Tuesday, January 19, 2010

In John Stossel's Crosshairs: ObamaCzar Sunstein

Obama-appointed Czar Sunstein: Put Big Brother Everywhere!

How much longer before he's removed?

How long can the Obamacrats avoid removing him like they were forced to remove the other Czar, Van Jones, the racist, communist revolutionary?

Cass Sunstein.  That frightening-extremist Obama "Czar".

The more you look at Sunstein, the more you feel dread and foreboding.  He's that ominous, as are the rest of the three-dozen-odd "Czars" of Obama (Russia had fewer "Czars"!).

I mentioned the same point previously, but now John Stossel (formerly of ABC News, now of FOX News, where he's actually allowed to tell us the truth!) has discovered the same damning information about the "Czar" and is telling more folks about it than have already known.

Czar Sunstein's scary writing provided at the Stossel link.

Stossel's astonished reaction:
That's right. Obama's Regulation Czar is so concerned about citizens thinking the wrong way that he proposed sending government agents to "infiltrate" these groups and manipulate them. This reads like an Onion article: Powerful government official proposes to combat paranoid conspiracy groups that believe the government is out to get them...by proving that they really are out to get them. Did nothing of what Sunstein was writing strike him as...I don't know...crazy? "Cognitive infiltration" of extremist groups by government agents? "Stylized facts"? Was "truthiness"  too pedantic?
 Stossel directs us to leftist Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald, who says:
Sunstein advocates that the Government's stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into "chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups."  He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called "independent" credible voices to bolster the Government's messaging (on the ground that those who don't believe government sources will be more inclined to listen to those who appear independent while secretly acting on behalf of the Government).   This program would target those advocating false "conspiracy theories," which they define to mean: "an attempt to explain an event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role."  Sunstein's 2008 paper was flagged by this blogger, and then amplified in an excellent report by Raw Story's Daniel Tencer.

Hmm.  That's a bit like what the likes of Richard Warman, the infamous, hateful Canadian "human rights" lunatic who, via the fascist, unconstitutional Canadian "Human Rights" Commission, adopted a neo-Nazi identity to infiltrate online fora he didn't like, attempting to entrap them into saying something "hateful" by saying "hateful" stuff himself and hoping for agreement with his B.S.   If he found anything he deemed "hateful", he'd then have the CHRC summon the site owners for persecution for "hate speech", to face an absolutely, 100% chance of conviction without any semblance of a fair trial, and without any evidence or defence considered by the CHRC Commissars in their star chamber.  Then the fine would be thousands of dollars, half of which Warman himself would pocket for his efforts!  The persecuted victims would have their rights taken away, be forbidden to express any inconvenient opinions again, and have their lives ruined.  Yep, that's more or less what would happen.
Sunstein himself -- as part of his 2008 paper -- explicitly advocates that the Government should pay what he calls "credible independent experts" to advocate on the Government's behalf, a policy he says would be more effective because people don't trust the Government itself and would only listen to people they believe are "independent."  In so arguing, Sunstein cites the Armstrong Williams scandal not as something that is wrong in itself, but as a potential risk of this tactic (i.e., that it might leak out), and thus suggests that "government can supply these independent experts with information and perhaps prod them into action from behind the scenes," but warns that "too close a connection will be self-defeating if it is exposed."  In other words, Sunstein wants the Government to replicate the Armstrong Williams arrangement as a means of more credibly disseminating propaganda -- i.e., pretending that someone is an "independent" expert when they're actually being "prodded" and even paid "behind the scenes" by the Government -- but he wants to be more careful about how the arrangement is described (don't make the control explicit) so that embarrassment can be avoided if it ends up being exposed.

Hmm... I think this is already happening.  Obviously the Obamacrats are providing talking points to the Big Old Media, who pretends to be "independent" and who obviously attempts to manipulate the public perception as to what's what, feeding them what they're "supposed" go get, and denying them all sorts of important, newsworthy information they desperately need.  Obviously.  After all, extremely rarely does the Big Old Media tell us anything that would embarrass the Obamacrat Reich.  Such as  the inconvenient truth about Czar Sunstein!  Such as the inconvenient truth about ACORN (they covered up the recent scandal that devastated ACORN), the CAIR, etc., etc...  Keep in mind that this is the very same Big Old Media who never, never, ever passed up an opportunity to wage hellbent warfare against the Bush Administration!  Whatever was discovered that sounded bad about the Bushites, was always trumpeted and tearfully screamed about by the perpetually-unhinged Big Old Media for as long as possible, all bloody day long!
In this 2008 paper, then, Sunstein advocated, in essence, exactly what the Obama administration has been doing all year with Gruber:  covertly paying people who can be falsely held up as "independent" analysts in order to more credibly promote the Government line.  Most Democrats agreed this was a deceitful and dangerous act when Bush did it, but with Obama and some of his supporters, undisclosed arrangements of this sort seem to be different.  Why?  Because, as Sunstein puts it:  we have "a well-motivated government" doing this so that "social welfare is improved."  Thus, just like state secrets, indefinite detention, military commissions and covert, unauthorized wars, what was once deemed so pernicious during the Bush years -- coordinated government/media propaganda -- is instantaneously transformed into something Good.

They're like...

It's not wrong when we, the Democrats, do it!  In fact, it's right, and good, when we do it, because WE are right and good, and the other guys are wrong and bad!  

Ah... apparently the Democrats, and Obama, aren't very much different in tactics and deception than was the Bush-Cheney administration.  Apparently the Obamacrats actually embrace the very same sort of behavior in government that they condemned, with the most extreme language ever heard, whenever it was discovered being done by Bush-Cheney (but at least Bush-Cheney did it in the name of national security, against the enemies of the American People, rather than what the Obamacrats do it for, which is to silence dissent against any policies, as we saw with their abuse of the DHS for the purpose of recommending to American police forces to profile anyone who disagreed with the Obamacrat Reich's policies!).

Hey, if he was wearing shiny black gloves, he'd look just like Dr. No with a better tan!

No comments: