Followers

Total Pageviews

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Walter Williams: Big time propagandist



I'm going to have to set my alarm and start taking my blood-pressure medication at 5:00AM, if this morning's Walter William’s column titled “Liberals, Progressives and Socialist” is an example of what we will be seeing for the next 89 days. It's the same red baiting tactics but Mr. Williams just inserted some new names and deleted ACORN.

Walter Williams is just a black version of Glenn Beck but with a lot more education. He's a libertarian and a supporter or Ron Paul, and endorses a laissez-faire economic system in which the government should not interfere with commerce. Anything short of that is considered socialism or communism. He's out there on the outer edges because he believes in legalization that would allow someone to sell their own body organs and after reading the founders documents, he concludes that it is the right of U.S. states to secede from the union. Mr. Williams’s appeals to the low information voter and those who like to get their ears tickled, but I have to give him props, as I would any snake oil salesman; he's made a lot of money off the gullible.

The first four paragraphs of his article accurately describe some of the most ruthless regimes, but he inserts his definition of what their motive was. As Glenn Beck does, he picked up the words "social justice"(imagine him using a chalkboard)  and did his best to link the Wall Street occupiers to the fascist and totalitarian dictators who committed mass murder. If pushed, he would say, "I was not calling them mass butchers I was just be saying that's how Hitler got his start in Germany." It's 6° of Kevin Bacon to the extreme. The propaganda wouldn't be complete, unless there was a reference to an Obama appointee or a former member of the administration. He uses a controversial statement from Anita Dunn speech to some high-school graduates  where she said “Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa as two of her "favorite political philosophers." Beck stated that the speech revealed Dunn as a Maoist, while Dunn stated that, her reference was meant to be ironic, and was a quote borrowed from Republican strategist Lee Atwater. If that's the best he's got, he is deceiving his readers but then again, as long as their ears are tickled; nothing else matters.

Walter William's fear mongering article wouldn't be complete, unless he used the words" loss of freedom or liberty." In a typical victim fashion, he blames the academic community, the media elite, stalwarts of the Democratic Party, and organizations like the NAACP, La Raza, and Green for All, the Sierra Club and the Children's Defense Fund. I guess they are more fearful than the Neo-Nazi clubs. I guess voter suppression doesn't register as a loss of freedom in his mind. Mr. Williams is an ideologue, who believes either you with him or against him (and he's always right) because, if you don’t like his opinions, then you believe in the primacy of the state over individual rights. The author asks," you don't believe it, just ask yourself: which way are we headed tiny steps at a time-toward greater liberty our toward more government control over our lives?" How ironic, I would bet that Mr. Williams believes in the republican led personhood bills headed toward our legislation. Mr. Williams and his ilk, do not own the definition of liberty or freedom; I am 67 years old and have never been fearful of losing my freedom or liberty. It's always available at the ballot box; sometimes I win, sometimes I lose.

Mr. William's piece is just the preamble to the familiar culture war politics we are about to endure. It's the first shot across the bow because the previous Romney campaign tactics are not working, so they need to go to what they think will work, and that is welfare. Recently, the Romney campaign launched an ad stating that Obama is gutting Welfare Reform Bill Clinton, and the GOP led Congress voted and signed into a "welfare to work" legislation. The Ad Praises Bill Clinton, trying to lure the Reagan Democrats and uses the typical "too lazy to work" byline to reel in the 6% moderates. The only trouble is, that the ad is a complete lie. According to ABC News "These requirements are quotas, which states must meet to receive federal welfare dollars under Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF, pronounced “taniff”): certain percentages of enrolled households must meet “work activity'” requirements, including work training, job searches, “job clubs'” that offer job-search advice, and job searches with verified paperwork from employers where jobs were sought.

HHS announced that states can propose pilot programs, which can include changes to how qualified welfare recipients are counted. If HHS approves a state’s program, it will grant a waiver from federal work-activity requirements. For instance, HHS suggests, states could propose, “projects that demonstrate superior employment outcomes” if work-activity participation rate requirements are dropped and replaced by other measurements of “employment outcome.”

This is another area where the federal government wants to give more rights to the states, but it's demonized for political gain.

I'm feeling a lot better now, but my work is not done because there are many misconceptions that are being thrown around as facts about the constitution and the role of government. I can't do much with a “unverified comment" but if I can make one person aware of another viewpoint, it might help them from being a victim of propaganda. I am just a lowly poster without clout but I'm aware of that; I’m not like the gun owner that thinks he needs a gun to protect him from a repressive regime.

22 comments:

born2Bme said...

If we can get enough "unverified" posts, maybe they will take off. People who actually read the VA, might notice the number there and click on it.
This is going to be a long few months. I cannot wait for the debates where each will have to actually defend their comments on public television.

Mike said...

I see your point born2Bme, but I don't know if enough people are interested enough to give it the initial jump start it needs. I really wish I could write a VA blog titled " Article 1 Section 8,general welfare clause" and be able to challenge those who take a a view different than mine..

People seem to think that we only have a Hamiltonian view(Congress has no limited power) or a Madisonian view (Congress has very limited power) .. President James Monroe came out with a more moderate tiebreaker saying it it could not be a redistribution of wealth strictly for the benefit of local or regional interests; it had to accomplish some legitimate national interest. To be more concrete, For example,Congress declined to fund the dredging of the Savannah River but approved an appropriation for a lighthouse at the entrance of the Chesapeake Bay: The latter was valid because it benefited coastal trade for the nation, the former invalid because it would solely benefit Georgia and South Carolina..... Homeland Security,the EPA,FBI, and the IRS are agencies with a legitimate national interest.

I have little tolerance for those who try to tell me what the founders meant when in reality they were all over the map..Madison,Jefferson and Hamilton are just 3 examples of some who had some very heated arguments.

Mike said...

born
Yes it will nice to get off the Romneyhood and Obamaloney comments and back to the merits of each parties's tax plans and direction for the future.

born2Bme said...

when is the first debate?

Mike said...

Here is a little more than what you asked for:..:-)

"Topic: Domestic policy
Air Time: 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time
Location: University of Denver in Denver, Colorado
Sponsor: Commission on Presidential Debates
Participants: President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney
Moderator: To be announced
The debate will focus on domestic policy and be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on topics to be selected by the moderator and announced several weeks before the debate.
The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the topic.

October 11, 2012
Vice Presidential Topic: Foreign and domestic policy
Air Time: 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time
Location: Centre College in Danville, Kentucky
Sponsor: Commission on Presidential Debates
Participants: Vice President Joe Biden and the GOP Vice Presidential nominee
Moderator: To be announced

The debate will cover both foreign and domestic topics and be divided into nine time segments of approximately 10 minutes each. The moderator will ask an opening question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the question.

October 16, 2012
Obama/Romney Topic: Town meeting format including foreign and domestic policy
Air Time: 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time
Location: Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York
Sponsor: Commission on Presidential Debates
Participants: President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney
Moderator: To be announced

The second presidential debate will take the form of a town meeting, in which citizens will ask questions of the candidates on foreign and domestic issues. Candidates each will have two minutes to respond, and an additional minute for the moderator to facilitate a discussion. The town meeting participants will be undecided voters selected by the Gallup Organization.

October 22, 2012
Obama/Romney Topic: Foreign policy
Air Time: 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time
Location: Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida
Sponsor: Commission on Presidential Debates
Participants: President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney
Moderator: To be announced

dale said...

Yes, it will be a long 89 days over on the left side of Victoria. It will only get better after that.

Mike said...

It will get after that depends on what side of the fence you are on..:-)

An Obama victory will make it better for me.

born2Bme said...

A Romney win scares the you-know-what out of me. If he wins, lets just pray that the GOP doesn't get control of Congress too.
In 4 years, their policies will strip everything from the bottom 90% and deliver it into the hands of the top 10% (I might be wrong on the %'s, but you get the idea)

The one bright note to a Romney win is that those poor misguided souls that support him now will have a rude awakening.

dale said...

You know my side of the fence. It is the one which flows with the bounty of private sector opportunity and very limited government.

BO: "If you got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

You bet, Uncle Barack took my risk. Uncle Barack provided me the handout. Uncle Barack held my hand. I got it, without Uncle Barack, I just can not survive on my own. I feel better already. HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE Yes Mike, without Mr Obama, you just can not survive on your own.

Mike said...

born2Bme

It's too bad because almost every president carries coattails and yes it will be a redistribution of the wealth upward and the first step to privatizing Medicare.

Oh it's the same republicans that voted for President George W. Bush, I can still remember the comments from the forum after the financial crisis;" I'm a conservative not a Republican" and to that I replied" it's the same thing, but you don't want to own up to the fiscal mess he left.... The GOP voters have selected amnesia; the years 2000-2008 is a fog for them....:-)

born2Bme said...

*rolleyes* at dale

Mike said...

dale

lol..When all else fails you go back to GOP talking points.You are doing exactly what Walter Williams does;obfuscate the truth.

Sometimes it's not about you Dale....Now do me a favor and go back to a couple of blogs of mine,view the YouTube of what President Obama actually said and if you interpreted handouts let me know..... And if you can find where he did; I'll be more glad to apologize for not agreeing with your astute interpretation.

I don't really care about personal stories per say but I know a lot of individuals like myself who thanks all those who has helped us throughout the years. I didn't do anything by myself, because I had great public teachers, used the public libraries and public schools and after serving in the military ,I then used some elements of the GI bill. I appreciate that my tax dollars goes to public servants like policeman, firemen, teachers and to repair the infrastructure and I'm more than happy to continue the cycle for those behind me.

Others can pat themselves on the back and say they went at it alone but a lot us know better. I don't really need a pat on the back for my mediocre work history but at least I can say I understood what the president was talking about.

born2Bme said...

Is that first debate on October 3rd? I see the date on all the others, but not that one.

born2Bme said...

LOL Mike,

I bet you can go back into dale's comment history and pick out some really funny quotes of his taken out of context and post them as the gospel truth.

dale, what do you think? After all, if you said it, it's got to be the only true meaning, right?

Can you even imagine anyone thinking that any business can do it all alone? If you stop and think about all of the public entities that it takes to make a business successful, it is mind-boggling.

dale said...

Mike, we will seldom agree, but at least we can laugh. I watched the Barack interview. And I do understand what he was referring to. We are all interconnected. None of us are islands. BTW, psst, he was not saying business owners needed government. I did think my remark would catch your attention. (Weren't most of your cartoon clips taken from 60's George Wallace slogans?) You democrats just keep on recycling your old material. ;)

Mike said...

Born

Yes mam,after the conventions first at the University of Denver ,Oct. 3,2012.

It's a left/right outlook but in Dales's case it has a Libertarian twist like 
hating all things government.

The lefties like me and other people from my generation do not like to toot our own horn and that's backed up by studies...Older workers resumes aren't as glowing as the younger workers.

It shows up in politics whereas Romney will brag on America's greatness even if he has to do it on the backs of Palestinians...President Obama is seen by the right as being an appeaser because he will talk of another countries' greatness while abroad.

If nothing else you would have to think that President Obama thinks that he wouldn't take a political hit for saying that people took out government loans or grants to start a business.He was trying to say we are all in this together..To some,it's a daily US against THEM.

Mike said...

Dale,you may be right I have no idea where those cartoons came from.

You've got to undrestand context..This morning Walter Williams got under my skin and I retaliated ...:-) The post had nothing to do with my favorite libertarian,Dale Zuck....And if we can't laugh then what good is a dialogue?

I'm having VA forum withdrawals ...:-)

Mike said...

Uh-oh according to Drudge "Romney Aide Touts RomneyCare

Mitt Romney's campaign is angering conservatives by touting Romney's Massachusetts health care overhaul -- a subject he has gone to great lengths to avoid. Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul brought up the law in response to a Priorities USA ad in which a steelworker connects his unemployment -- and resulting lack of health insurance -- to the death of his wife. "If people had been in Massachusetts, under Gov. Romney's health care plan, they would have had health care," Saul said.

dale said...

Mike, I join in to laugh and be laughed with. Never take anything I post with malice. I never try to personally injure another. Yet, I do not think I fit in perfectly with the Libertarians. I still consider myself a far right Republican with a strong leaning toward equality for all. Republicans say they are for such, but we know there is difference between words and deeds.

dale said...

Mike, I join in to laugh and be laughed with. Never take anything I post with malice. I never try to personally injure another. Yet, I do not think I fit in perfectly with the Libertarians. I still consider myself a far right Republican with a strong leaning toward equality for all. Republicans say they are for such, but we know there is difference between words and deeds.

dale said...

Born,

I reread your question to me. If you go back, I do not think you will find thoughts where I will contradict myself. Generally, (as Mike says of me... I am white or black. I try not to change my views. If I did, that would mean my principles are wishy-washy. That would make me like all the Establishment Folks from whom I and others am trying to reform the Party.

We are very interconnected as I noted earlier.

born2Bme said...

No, dale, I know you are not wishy-washy. I was just trying to point out that sometimes we say things, that when taken out of context, can mean something completely different than that we intended to say.