Remembering D-Day

Today marks the 63rd anniversary of D-Day, the massive allied invasion of Nazi-occupied France. On June 6, 1944 American, British and Canadian troops landed on the Normandy coast amid stiff Nazi resistance. The Americans landed on the worst beach, "Bloody Omaha." More than 130,000 allied troops landed on Normandy that first day. Many were killed before firing a shot. Able Company, the first company ashore, suffered severe casualties. Some landing craft were sunk and never made it to shore; one that did land had its entire content of soldiers machine gunned seconds after the ramp dropped. Everyone of them was killed.

Only two riflemen from Company A fought effectively that day. They joined a Ranger battallion and fought with them. In one day, American fatalities were greater than those suffered in four years in Iraq.

To fully comprehend the horror that day, read "First Wave at Omaha Beach" by S.L.A. Marshall.

Our friends at the French blog "Support American Soldiers" also has an extensive article on D-Day, complete with pictures and maps.

Give a thought today to the thousands of soldiers who died and those who survived. They were heroes in ways we cannot begin to understand.

My uncle went ashore on Omaha Beach on D-Day+1. He was a medic. Before the invasion, he (and all other soldiers) received a printed message from General Eisenhower. I have that message, along with other artifacts from my uncle's participation. A scanned copy of it is below. Click on the image to see it full size.

Is Barack Obama a Marxist?

The nutroots are outraged because Tom Delay called Barack Obama "a Marxist" today. Delay was partially correct - from what we know about Obama, he is a member of the far left, but Marxism is probably not the correct category.

Marxism is totalitarianism where the entire means of production (the economy) is owned and directed by the state. It calls for armed revolution against the non-communist ruling class. Revolution is usually followed by widespread execution of capitalists, business owners and large farm owners. Does Obama believe that? Perhaps, but I haven't seen any evidence of that.

What Obama is, clearly, is a fascist. The most honest spin one could put on Obama's political leanings is that he is a democratic fascist. That's different than historical fascism, where the state is ruled by a single dictator. Democratic fascism would be ruled by a single political party, to the extent possible.

Traditionally, democratic fascism is made possible by major media who are in that party's hip pocket and who are the gatekeepers as to what news is heard and which is not, and the spin and intepretation put on that news. Expect Obama to reinstate the fairness doctrine, where conservative talk radio would cease to exist. Expect also a massive gerrymandering of congressional districts to create safe enclaves for Democrats. In those rare times when Democratic legislation is defeated, expect more Democrat "living constitution" judges who will legislate from the bench.

The Democrats may try to expand their constituency by giving citizenship to illegal aliens, and the vote to illegals by suppressing voter identification legislation. Finally, control of the ballot box will allow dead people to vote Democratic, as they have several times in the past. When all else fails, the Democrats can appoint special judges to persecute and prosecute Republicans, as they have done to Tom Delay and Scooter Libby.

There are many ways to compromise a representative democracy and Democrats are well schooled in all of them.

Fascism in its mildest form is still collectivist and socialist, but the state does not own the entire means of production. Many businesses are left in the hands of private owners, as long as they support the objectives of the fascist state. Nevertheless, historic fascism did nationalize certain key industries. Obama would probably nationalize the medical industry, as Hillary tried to do, but I know of no others. Of course, outright ownership of the means of productions isn't necessary to control industry. Industry can be intimidated and/or bribed to fall into line. The power to tax and regulate is the power to destroy, and very high taxes would be a hallmark of the Obama administration. Repeated IRS audits of conservative organizations, common during Bill Clinton's administration, provides great intimidation to those businesses who don't embrace "the program." For those who do support it, there are tax credits, corporate welfare and pork projects, paid for by the taxpayers.

No, Obama is a fascist within the correct historical definition of the term. See my post on Jonah Goldberg's book "Liberal Fascsim" for details.

Fighting Back: Send Mo-Toons to Islamic Embassies!

SIOE, or "Stop the Islamization of Europe" website is involved in active resistance to the islamization of Europe. But you probably figured that out by their title.

Upset by the recent bombing of the Danish Embassy in Pakistan (over the Danish cartoons of Mohammed), they have come up with a "strike back" strategy. The strategy is this: draw a cartoon of Mohammed, or use an existing one, and send it (anonymously) to Pakistani embassies. Every time the radical Muslims create terrorism over cartoons, more cartoons will result.

SIOE has posted a list of addresses for Pakistani embassies and consulates, as well as Pakistani news outlets and broadcasting organizations.

A word of caution: don't use the Danish cartoons, as they are copyrighted and you could be sued. Those cartoonists already have death threats and fatwas hanging over them, and don't want you to make it worse.

After you draw the cartoon, send it to SIOE. They will post the best cartoons on their site and, each Friday, will select the best cartoon for the week, and make a t shirt bearing the cartoon, as a prize to the creator.

For details go here.

Hat tip: Gates of Vienna

The 2008 Election: An Age-Old Fight Renewed

Now that Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party, we are again faced with a new battle in an age-old fight, that between collectivism and freedom. Make no mistake about it, Obama represents the collectivist position. Under Obama and the increasingly left wing Democrats, those who work and invest will be punished for their productivity; those who are less productive will be rewarded.

Some of the differences between left and right are described in the table below.

	Differences Between Liberalism and Conservatism
	Liberalism	Conservatism	Implications of Liberal Victory
	Internationalist; does not identify with its own nation, culture or traditions. Not patriotic, or views patriotism as fascistic, narrow-minded or racist	Nationalist; identifies with its own nation, culture and traditions. Patriotic, believes in national sovereignty and that its system is preferable to all others.	Liberalism is more prone to accept international jurisdiction, multiculturalism, unrestrained immigration; has a lower survival instinct
	Collectivist; sees the state as the principal organizing agent of society; believes that "the public good" trumps individual liberties and self-interest; socialist economically	Individualist; believes that "the government that governs least, governs best"; believes that the preservation of individual rights is the major purpose of government; capitalistic economically	Liberalism results in a nanny state that regulates human behavior in support of the state and its programs, through both legislation and social pressure
	Regulates the economy through high taxation and legislation; sees the economy as publicly owned; seeks to own or control the means of production	Believes in minimal regulation of the economy; believes the economy is owned by those who produce the goods and services, i.e. the means of production	Liberalism results in higher taxes, punishes the productive and rewards sloth; it has a dampening effect on the economy and raises the cost of living
	Hostile to the Military; believes that war is never jusitifed; that those who attack us do so only because we have wronged them somehow; that all national conflicts can be resolved by seeking consensus and by diplomacy	Believes in a strong National Defense; that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty"; that there always has been and always will be dictators and tyrants who wish to exert control over others through force, infiltration and sabotage; that the projection of American power is sometimes necessary, and that its use deters aggression and actually prevents more wars	Liberalism underfunds or undermines the military; underfunds or undermines our espionage agencies; weakens the national will to win wars or resist aggression. As a result, it makes America appear irresolute, weak and amenable to force

Britain's National Suicide

The Brussels Journal (Belgium) has a great article this morning by Fjordman, "The Execution of Britain." I disagree with the title -- when one takes his own life, it is suicide, not execution.

The article, however, describes well Britain's accelerating slide into Islamic barbarism, the suppression of free speech, especially criticism of Islam, and the dilution of national identity, pride and boundaries. The massive immigration of anti-western, unassimilable Muslims into Britain is, of course, the self-inflicted coup de grace.

There is a depressing fatalism in Britain today, as if many native Brits have just given up, accepting their fate. They seem to see the demise of their nation and culture as a done deal, as if the hand of history has been wrought against them and all they can do is watch the sun set on their once great nation. They're wrong. Let the seeds of a British reclamation begin today, in the hearts and minds of one or two or a hundred people, and let it grow to critical mass. Resist! Do not go meekly into the dust bin of history.

When the current system of government fails to protect the rights, safety and culture of the citizenry, the citizens (to quote Lincoln) "have a right to throw off their existing form of government and institute a new one that suits them better." The citizens of Britain are fast approaching that point - where, in my opinion, the legitimacy of their established government no longer exists. At that point revolution is called for. Preferably, it will be a revolution of the ballot box, followed by a new written constitution. However, there are no guarantees. A revolution that ends with a leftist traitor dangling from every lamp post would suit me just fine, but that's just me.

Fjordman writes:

In May 2008, 18 year-old Ben Smith was stopped in a routine check. The police officer noticed an English flag on the parcel shelf and ordered him to remove it because it was "racist towards immigrants."

One of the first things foreign powers usually do when they invade a country is to ban its national symbols. The fact that you can no longer run your flag in parts of Britain – and the Netherlands, Sweden, France, etc. – shows that the country is de facto under occupation, not just by Muslims, but by Multiculturalists and Globalists of all kinds.

In an essay entitled Put away the flags, Howard Zinn, the Leftist author of the best-selling book A People's History of the United States, writes that "On this July 4, we would do well to renounce nationalism and all its symbols: its flags, its pledges of allegiance, its anthems, its insistence in song that God must single out America to be blessed. Is not nationalism – that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder – one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred?" He concludes that "We need to assert our allegiance to the human race, and not to any one nation."

The problem is, rights can only be protected by sovereign states upholding their territorial integrity. How is "the global community" or "the human race" going to protect Mr. Zinn's liberties? For a free society to function, the state has to pass laws in the best interest of its citizenry and enforce these within its territory. Otherwise, self-government is impossible. In order to defend this territory from outside aggression, people need to identify with it as something more than just a random space on a map. By removing sovereign states, you remove the very foundations of a free society.

Read it all here.

Artist Donates Paintings of Fallen Soldiers to Families

Kaziah Hancock is an artist who lives on a ranch in Utah. When the first U.S. soldier from Utah was killed, she painted his portrait and made it a gift to his parents. But she didn't stop there. She kept on painting portraits of fallen U.S. service men and women, nearly 250 of them, from almost every state. She frames them and sends them to the parents, a gift of love. She refuses to accept a single penny for her work, which normally brings in thousands of dollars for each portrait or landscape she paints.

When she painted the portrait of Dale Panchot, a soldier from Minnesota, she said that he should have been a husband and a father, and should have lived to age 80. "I sure wish I didn't have to paint his portrait," she said. Dale's parents were touched to receive the painting, which now hangs in their living room.

Kaziah Hancock is one great lady, doing her part in the best way she can, armed with love, canvas and an artist's paint brush.

See her story at the Military Times website.

First photo: Kaziah shows a finished portrait ready for shipment to parents.

Second photo: Portrait of Dale Panchot

...

Kaziah's Website

Kaziah has a website at this link. You can view all of her paintings of fallen soldiers there, too - she calls them Portraits of Heroes.

Hat Tip for Story: Larry Bovshow. Larry is a long-time reader of Saber Point. He's a real estate broker in Beverly Hills, California. Larry, the next time I am out that way, I want to buy dinner for you and your wife.

Jeff Denham Recall Goes to Ballot Today

Jeff Denham, a California Republican and state senator, is the subject of a recall election in California today. Denham is being punished for standing firm in his refusal to vote in favor of the California budget that was approved by Governor Schwarzenegger.

Denham, a rare politician of principle, stood up to pressure from Democrat senators and refused to vote for the $14 billion budget deficit.

Will Jeff be recalled? Quite probably - not for committing any malfeasance in office, but merely for voting his conscience and those of his district. It's called democracy.

I am disappointed in our wimpoid governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. I am ashamed to say that I voted for him twice, but I will never vote for him again under any circumstances. The governor is a hostage to his liberal Democrat wife who, to borrow a phrase from Rush Limbaugh, keeps the Governor's manhood in a "testical lockbox."

Facts about the Recall:
1. During the 2007 budget battle, Senator Jeff Denham refused to vote for Senator Don Perata’s version of the state budget. That’s because Senator Denham believed the budget was covering up huge deficits. The non-partisan Legislative Analyst proved Denham right, when she announced the Perata budget was actually $10 billion more in debt than previously admitted.

2. To punish Denham for exposing the Perata deficit, Senator Don Perata had a Recall filed against Denham in his district. When local citizens refused to circulate the Recall petitions, Perata’s campaign operatives hired signature collectors, some from out-of-state, to collect Recall petition signatures. Such actions violate California election law.

3. The Recall process became a part of the California Constitution through the reform efforts of Governor Hiram Johnson. Recalls have always been viewed as a means to remove an elected official from public office who has committed a crime or been guilty of malfeasance. The Perata Recall against Senator Jeff Denham has been widely criticized by the district’s editorial boards as an “abuse of the process,” since there are no such accusations against Sen. Denham.

4. Most of the newspapers in the 12th Senate District has condemned Perata’s Recall against Senator Denham as wrong.

5. According to polls, a majority of both Republicans and Democrats believe the Recall is wrong and plan to vote against it. Prominent elected Democrats from every county in the 12th Senate District have joined with elected Republicans and non-partisan officeholders to condemn the Recall.

6. The Perata Recall against Senator Denham will appear on the June 3rd ballot, and is expected to be defeated by a large margin.

Let's hope so.

UPDATE: Jeff Denham easily defeated the recall. The AP says:

Voters in Denham's central California district soundly rejected an attempt
Tuesday to recall the Merced Republican. With 31 percent of precincts
reporting, more than 78 percent of voters were opposing the recall.

Fascism: A Political Philosophy of the Left

Members of differing political parties love to refer to their opponents as "fascists." For years the popular myth has been that the further to the right one moves in the political spectrum, the closer he gets to fascism. Jonah Goldberg wrote a well argued, fact-enriched book called "Liberal Fascism." In the book Goldberg describes how fascism is not a right wing phenomenon, but another variant of socialism. Fascism, clearly, is a faith born of the left.

Whenever fascism is mentioned, one cannot help but think of Nazis and Hitlerism. The Nazis were fascists, but not all fascists were Nazis. Fascist Italy under Mussolini predated Nazism; neither it nor fascist Spain under Franco were anti-semitic, racist or genocidal. The Nazis were the worst variant of fascism.

Consequently, it would be ridiculous to compare modern Democrats to Nazis. However, this is not so when comparing them to the more benign fascists of Mussolini's pre-war Italy or Bismarck's Germany.

Fascism in its less savage forms was paternalistic, a nanny-state that wished to control every aspect of citizen's lives for their own good. Its similarities to modern liberalism are striking.

Indeed, in the prewar America of FDR, many Democrats admired fascism and thought it a grand experiment. And, the fascists of both Italy and Germany admired them back.

Okay, that's nice, but what is Fascism exactly? There is still a lot of argument about what is and isn't fascism; however, Goldberg shows that it usually has the following characteristics:

1. It is totalitarian; everything in society is viewed as political.
2. It is built on a philosophy of creating "a new man," where private interests are subordinate to the public interest, where all private citizens actively support the missions of the state.
3. It is anti-capitalism. However, it practices "corporatism," where corporations who support the government agenda are guaranteed markets, prices and an absence of competition. Corporations therefore become active partners of the government.
4. It is pro-socialism, often openly so. Mussolini claimed to be a socialist until the day he died. Fascism in Italy and Germany was pro-working class, supporting a minimum wage, generous medical insurance and state-funded pensions and other benefits.
5. Fascism sought to end class designations within society and to erase class warfare between rich and poor.
6. Fascism was opposed to religion, particularly Christianity. Both Mussolini and Hitler hated Christianity and wished to return to pre-Christian paganism. The Jacobins of France, the first fascists, hated Catholicism and wished to diminish the influence of the church on society.
7. Fascism sought to substitute the state in the place of God, to create a new "religion of the state."
8. Fascism sought to break the sanctity of the family, especially its hold over the beliefs and attitudes of children. It sought to ingrain fascistic principles from an early age, and to obtain control over children by moving them from the home into government boarding schools (e.g. the Jacobins).
10. Fascism sought to mobilize society through the generation of crises, such as war. Wars make society more malleable and willing to submit to collectivist goals for the common good. Modern day Dems seek to substitute "the moral equivalent of war," i.e. to generate other crises to encourage mobilization. The current crisis-mongering over global warming is undoubtedly a false crisis developed for this end.

Note that not all items in the fascist agenda are horrible -- some are undoubtedly worthy (e.g., the elimination of class distinctions).

Goldberg describes several phases of fascism, including:
1. The Jacobins of the French Revolution of the late 18th century
2. Bismarck's Germany of the 19th century
3. Woodrow Wilson's administration, the most fascistic period in American history
4. Benito Mussolini's Fascist Italy
5. Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany
6. FDR's New Deal
7. The New Left's antics in the 1960's

Jonah Goldberg describes fascism this way:

Fascism is a religion of the state. It assumes the organic unity of the body
politic and longs for a national leader attuned to the will of the people. It is
totalitarian in that it views everything as political and holds that any action
of the state is justified to achieve the common good. It takes responsibility
for all aspects of life, including our health and well-being, and seeks to
impose uniformity of thought and action, whether by force or through regulation
and social pressure. Everything, including the economy and religion, must be
aligned with its objectives. Any rival identity is part of the "problem" and
therefore defined as the enemy. I will argue that contemporary American
liberalism embodies all of these aspects of fascism.

Fascism, like Communism, is socialism. However, fascism differs from Communism in one way: fascism is nationalistic in orientation, Communism is international. Fascists were loyal to their country and their culture, whereas Communists identified only with their ideology -- they did not identify with a particular nation or culture. Fascists and Communists hated each other, not because they wanted different systems, but because they were in competition for the same constituency. They were competing versions of socialism.

Goldberg also discussed various American personalities who are often wrongly described as "right wing" or "conservative," when they were in fact, FDR socialists. Senator Huey Long and Father Coughlin, the "radio priest" are two of these.

There are some surprising aspects of Nazi Germany that are more or less analogous to liberalism today. Germany's practice of eugenics, e.g. the sterilization of undesirable elements, is reflected in liberal support for abortion, which falls most heavily on racial minorities (half of all black pregnancies end in abortion). Less troublesome similarities include vegetarianism, organic foods and animal rights.

How did the fascists get shifted from political left to right in the minds of many? It happened when Stalin began labeling all anti-communists as "fascists." Even Trotskyites were "fascists." Over time this erroneous appellation became ingrained in the public consciousness. But it isn't true. As Goldberg proves with overwhelming argument, facts and examples, fascism was and is a component of the progressive left.

Funky Father Pfleger Does "Vanilla Ice"

Father Michael Pfleger of Chicago has been the focus of national attention since he delivered a racist "hate whitey" rant to Barack Obama's all-black congregation. Yes, Father Pfleger has demonstrated his bonafides as an authentic angry black. He did this through his afrocentrism, embrace of black liberation theology, detest for America and his anti-white racial animosity. There's just one problem: Father Pfleger is white.

Yesterday we explored the theme of radical priest Father Pfleger in his role as the new Al Jolsen (i.e. in "blackface"). Today Michelle Malkin referred to Pfleger as "Vanilla Ice." I had to laugh at that -- Vanilla Ice was a white rapper who co-opted the black street culture's monopoly on rap. Like black rappers, this white rapper danced around the stage like his butt was on fire, shooting out words from his mouth as if from a machine gun. Black rapper fans hated Vanilla Ice and he was the butt of many jokes. Vanilla Ice could do rap as well as anyone, but he wasn't authentic. He wasn't the "real thing."

Like Vanilla Ice, Father Pfleger does a good imitation of the angry black subculture, but that's all it is -- a form of pandering, of patronizing.

In any case, I whipped out my Photoshop tools and Voila! That's Father Pflger above as "Vanilla Ice." Groove for us, Father! Funky, funky!

......

Update: Pastorius from Infidel Blogger's Alliance sent me this great rap, dedicated to Father Pfleger:

Now the congregation is jumping
With the Ice on stage all the babes are pumpin'
Quick to the point to the point no faking
I'm cooking Kafir's like a pound of bacon
Spitting out grease with that ice ice flavor,
That's how I rolls in my Rolls, Father Pfleger
With my homies, Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright,
Says they likes me, even if I'm all white
Ice, Ice, Baby

Here's a video of Vanilla Ice

And here's Jim Carey's imitation of Vanilla Ice (this may be the video that inspired Father Pfleger!)

New Changes at Saber Point

New Blog Format

I have upgraded my site to the new blogger format. This format makes it easier to add gadgets and counters to the blog, and to change background and text colors.

I need a good quote instead of the "Riding Roughshod" quote I put up -- I am just using that as a space holder until I find a really good quote. If you have any suggestions, please let me know.

Language Translator Installed

I now have a widget installed on the left that allows the viewer to translate this entire blog into the language of their choice. It's the section at the top left of the page with all the national flags of nations.

If you want to see this blog in Japanese, for example, just click on the Japanese flag and wait a few moments. I tried it with several languages and it works quite well. My friend Carol at NoSheeplesHere put me onto it.

Try it out, particularly if you speak a language other than English.