From Wikipedia

“In the economic sphere, many fascist leaders have claimed to support a “Third Way” in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism. This was to be achieved by establishing significant government control over business and labour (Mussolini called his nation’s system “the corporate state”).”

My right wing friends cannot resist the characterization of Obama as a socialist.  He overtly talks of the need to redistribute the wealth and as such may fit the description, but we have been redistributing the wealth for some time.  We have one of the most progressive tax systems in the world; the richest 10% pay 55% of the taxes and the poorest 20% pay only 4%.  Obama may desire to make our system even more progressive or socialistic, but it is hard to claim that at a 36% top bracket we are capitalistic but at 40% we are socialistic.

What is clearly different under this president is the unprecedented encroachment into the business world.  Bush reacted to the financial crisis with huge sums to support the credit markets and it was probably necessary as much as it violates my sense of the proper role of government.  Part of this was caused by the government guarantees through Fannie Mae and part was caused by the absurd financial products comprising debt instruments so complicated no one could reasonably value them.

But under Obama this ‘control’ of the banking and financial industry has expanded to control or actual ownership of a large part of the auto industry, insurance industry, the health care industry, and the energy industry through the pending cap and trade legislation.  The strongly pro union card check bill, even when restoring the secret ballot, includes provisions to force arbitration if a contract is not signed 60 days after a successful election, allowing a federal bureaucrat to dictate wage and terms to a private company. The president has stepped over the law to dictate union benefits in the auto bankruptcy proceeding.  This is a form of corporatism that we have not seen since Mussolini’s Italy.

Mussolini also had financial crisis as an excuse. He was also supported by progressive elites both in Europe and in the United States. It was a decade later that fascism became more synonymous with racial and Anti-Semitic policies.

Fascist is pejorative and sounds extreme, but perhaps the word ‘corporatism’ relays the same message. The fact that ‘corporatism’ is the central economic policy of fascism conveys that the government takes extreme control over economic freedom.  Either word  is a more accurate description of Obama’s policies than mere socialism.

I had not paid much attention to the reported ‘coup’ in Honduras, until I heard Neal Boortz summarize the situation, apparently based on the Wall Street Journal article by Mary Anastasia O’Grady, “Honduras Defends Its Democracy”. Read the whole article here.

In summary, President Mel Zelaya, wanted to amend the constitution of Honduras to allow him to be president for life as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela did. In Honduras this requires a referendum which only the Congress can authorize.

Manuel Zelaya attempted to hold the referendum without Congressional approval and the courts forbid it, refusing to allow the ballots to be printed. Zelaya had the ballots printed in Venezuela by his model totalitarian dictator Hugo Chavez and delivered to Honduras. The Supreme Court ruled the referendum unconstitutional, because …. it was, and ordered the military not to carry out the election as it normally would do in the country.

The attorney general announced he would prosecute anyone trying to carry out the election, and arrested Zelaya and exiled him to Costa Rica.

Zelaya tried to put aside the rule of law and seize lifetime control. The rule of law won. It was not a coup in any common sense of the word. Yes he was removed from office by the military, but it was at the order of the courts and the attorney general and congress for openly violating the law, and trying to ursurp power while there was legal election to be held just a few months away

The most disturbing aspect is that Obama and Hillary Clinton openly supported Zelaya, insisting that he was ousted by an illegal coup. They clearly have no respect for the rule of law.

It is no secret that I have opposed most of Obama’s policies. I think card check was a job killer and that Cap and Trade is the most destructive economic act ever for absolutely no improvement in the environment. I have been stunned at the size of the so called “stimulus” package, the interference into our bankruptcy laws in the case of GM and Chrysler, and the misguided aim of his health insurance reforms. I doubt any of the supporters for these ludicrous expansions of government have any realistic possible idea how they will be paid for it.

But for our President and Secretary of State to openly support an illegal attempt by a Latin dictator to openly trounce his country’s constitution in order to establish a totalitarian rule may be the most worrisome act of this administration’s brief period in office. It clearly shows their contempt for the rule of law in favor of the rule of man.

Even my most liberal friends should be deeply concerned.

A few thoughts on the election….

I voted for McCain, but mostly against Obama. I was mostly concerned about 1- his proposal to increase taxes on producers while we are teetering on the edge of a serious recession, and 2- I was concerned about his relationships with Reverend Wright and others. Without much of a record of serious accomplishments I had nothing else to go on.

I am not depressed or hostile that Obama won. I am excited that America showed the tolerance to look beyond his skin and his name. I am pleased that more people feel they have true representation, as shown by the record turnout. I hope he can live up to even a portion of the public’s expectations.

While McCain had the burden of being tied to an unpopular president and the financial meltdown (unfairly in my opinion), he lost the election with a poor and unfocused campaign. He kept pushing buttons and wasting precious campaign funds that did not work, such as the tiresome ties to Bill Ayers. As soon as he saw that he would be drastically outspent, he should have focused his message like a laser. He did not.

Sarah Palin is not as dumb as the press made her out to be, but she did not seem up to the task either. While intellectual depth is not enough to be president (or close to it), it is important to be able to justify your principles with some understanding if not experience. Without the ability to intellectually understand your principles one can be easily distracted by the crisis de jour. Without some level of intellectual understanding you just become a mindless populist.

I am a little concerned that the worldwide euphoria over Obama’s victory will come back to haunt him. He will be faced with many of the same tough decisions faced by his predecessors and he will make many similar actions that will not be popular in the court of world opinion. I predict he will get more criticism from the hard left than from the hard right.

Obama ended the option of public financing for elections that was championed by McCain Feingold. After he betrayed his pledge to take public funds and raised a fortune to defeat McCain, any one would be a fool to restrict themselves as McCain did. I would like to see a push for more disclosure even on small amounts, something Obama avoided in this election.

Many supporters answered my concerns about Obama’s policy proposals with “Oh he will surround himself with smart people”. I find that very unsatisfying especially in light of his past relationships. It was as if we should hope he will betray his pledges and promises and still vote for him.

I too hope he will betray many of his policy proposals. Isn’t that audacious?

SILVER LININGS, EVEN ON THE RIGHT
By Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

excerpts

Government financing of political campaigns, always a dreadful idea, is dead. Yes, Obama egregiously broke his solemn promise to accept public financing and its attendant spending limits. But having witnessed Obama’s astonishing financial blowout — he raised well over $600 million, crushing his rival in the money war and therefore in advertising and field organization — no future candidate will agree to be shackled by those limits.

A turn in the wilderness will do Republicans good. During the GOP’s years in power, the one-time party of fiscal sobriety and limited government turned into a gang of reckless spenders and government aggrandizers. If a few years in exile can lead Republicans back to their conservative, Reaganite roots, yesterday’s losses will not have been in vain.

But the most lustrous silver lining of all, even for disappointed Republicans, is the racial one. As a politician and policymaker, Obama distresses me; his extreme liberalism is decidedly not what the nation needs in its president. But as a symbol — a son of Africa elected to lead a majority-white nation that once enslaved Africans and treated their descendants with great cruelty — Obama’s rise makes me proud of my country. The anthem of the Civil Rights Movement was “We Shall Overcome.” Impossible as it might have seemed scant decades ago, we have.

His opponents may cite the huge fundraising advantage, the compliant media, and the possible campaign fraud- but in the end the voters trusted Obama and the Democrats more than McCain and the Republicans. Historically, past a certain point the additional money offers little advantage.

Obama’s campaign obviously did a lot of things right; very right. But he was also fortunate. He was running against a very tarnished opponent in the primary, Hillary Clinton; and he was also running against an even more tarnished Republican Party in the general election.

He was fortunate that the surge was successful, even though he was against it, because it removed the fear of terrorism from the election. It was ironic that it was Bush’s late success in Iraq, not his early failure that helped Obama. The financial meltdown could not have happened at a more convenient time; a huge event with massive uncertainty that occurred between the primaries and the general election. Voters largely vote their pocket book.

McCain and Palin ran more against Obama than for anything; that is a losing strategy. In fact many conservatives who were disenchanted with McCain and especially Palin voted more against Obama than for their party leaders.

And many reluctant Obama supporters were just voting against the Republican Party which many have come to despise, not without some reason.

I do not know that the outcome means that the country is turning left; personally I think the voters have risen far above simplistic left/ right descriptions and analogies.

He faces one of the most challenging times of any president. I hope he proves successful and confounds his critics including me. I could not be happier to confess how wrong I was about him.

I wish Obama and his administration the best.