Video: Time for another Mao-quoting Obama aide

posted at 8:23 pm on October 20, 2009 by Allahpundit

Meet Ron Bloom, your friendly neighborhood manufacturing czar. This was sent to us last night, then I forgot about it, and now that it’s posted at Ace’s I’m realizing why I forgot: There’s so little context that it’s hard to tell what his ultimate point is, really. To me, it sounds like he’s building to a “but,” and in any case, when he talks about power coming from the barrel of a gun, there’s no reason to think he’s not speaking metaphorically (i.e. political success depends more on strength and aggression than reasonableness and compromise). He also founded an investment banking firm before joining the Steelworkers, so he and the chairman clearly have their share of disagreements too. Besides, the most objectionable part of what Anita Dunn did wasn’t quoting Mao or even saying that she agreed with a statement of his; it was that she called him one of her favorite philosophers. Even in a best-case scenario where she really was joking, that’s an awfully cavalier joke coming from a presidential advisor.

Needless to say, if a Republican advisor ever began a sentence with, oh, “We agree with Senator Joe McCarthy that…”, you could pretty much stop the presses right there.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

He is right about power coming from the barrel of a gun. That is exactly why the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution was written. Not some silly nonsense about hunting or protecting your home. It is so the people have the power to throw off the tyrant. The Government that would force you to purchase health care if you did not want to. The government which would limit free speech. The government which would like to control the means of production. But for them to work their evil plan they must disarm the citizens. That is the trip wire. When they come to take mine they will be caught in the 3 sided crossfire. Neighbors just being neighborly

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on October 20, 2009 at 11:09 PM

For the sake of my education, could someone please tell me why focusing on incidents where Obama staff or supporters reference Mao – actually favorably or unfavorably it does not matter – are presented as significant arguments for or against Obama’s policies or proposed changes to the position of the executive branch of the US Government?

Because it shows the mindset (very twisted and incredibly un-American, if not directly in opposition to pretty much every single basic American value) and overarching sorts of sensibilities at work throughout the administration. Frankly, I find the Che and Castro references even worse, in this respect. Why is this difficult to understand? This is how you assess people and situations. You gain an understanding of HOW they think and what form the basic assumptions of their philosophy.

It would seem to me, the best way to refute Obama’s policies or positions would be to directly refute the actual content of his arguments.

We do that every single day, many times a day, as The Precedent is the dumbest person to ever occupy the White House. The guy is a total imbecile. And, even so, every policy he advocates works to harm the US. He’s lucky that destroying things don’t take even 1/1000th the talent it takes to create and build them.

I am not saying any one of Obama’s supporters or staff have not made quotable statements that prove they are in fact closet communist or socialist;

These are not closet communists. Many of them are quite open about their love of marxist theory. The Precedent wrote, in his own friggin’ book (really written by self-described, “marxist” and known terrorist scum, Bill Ayers) that he sought out the marxist professors in college. Have you been to college? Do you know who those folks are? I do. Most of us do. But The Precedent certainly never grew out of it, as a phase. He attended Trinity Crypto-Church for 20 years. Black liberation theology is warm-over marxism with a racist tinge. I mean, come on. These are not closet marxists. Harold Koh doesn’t hide the fact that he thinks that the US needs to cede sovereignty to an international body. That’s just insane, as anyone with any sense of evolutionary theory understands that such international organizations are sheer idiocies, from the theory itself, since any empowered, peerless, competitionless entity is guaranteed to grow in grotesque and destructive ways. This is just basic common sense, frankly.

These idiots are well out of the closet. But the public hasn’t yet come to grips with the leftist madness that is inhabiting the White House. We just defeated the USSR less than 20 years ago, and we have communists of all stripes filling the administration. It’s quite insane, really.

I am proposing focusing our attention and our time on these issues are not an effective use of our limited time and resources.

Focus your attention wherever you want. Most Americans are disgusted by communists. Everyone should be. Only the worst sorts of people espouse marxist philosophy – either criminals, psychopaths, or simple-minded useful idiots.

The one admitted flaw in my position: I personally do not have an appropriate substitute Obama weakness to propose for the spotlight. Damn!

Unquiet on October 20, 2009 at 10:55 PM

LOL. The Precedent has no positive qualities. The guy is stupid, arrogant (an interesting combo – that he seems to stupid to even see the problem … “profit and earnings ratios” … what a moron), and has a huge third-world chip on his shoulder. That’s probably an artifact of his having grown up and been educated in Indonesia, as a muslim. That’ll do it, you know.

progressoverpeace on October 20, 2009 at 11:16 PM

Just putting this out there; what context would this statement be OK in?

liquidflorian on October 20, 2009 at 11:21 PM

Just putting this out there; what context would this statement be OK in?

liquidflorian on October 20, 2009 at 11:21 PM

The very first part of the statement, “free market is a joke”, would be OK if one is talking about overregulation. But I’m sure that’s not Bloom’s point.
He is right about power coming from the barrel of a gun.

That is exactly why the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution was written.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on October 20, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Not really. Political power in this country comes from the consent of the governed. It’s why we’re usually spared gunfights in the streets at election time, or firing squads for political opponents. For now, anyway.

ddrintn on October 20, 2009 at 11:30 PM

I am so tired of Two Easy Rules to a Ripped Body. What in the world is a ripped body? Does Obama approve of ripped bodies the way he approves of women getting college degrees?

OT but perplexed…

Dhuka on October 20, 2009 at 11:39 PM

Needless to say, if a Republican advisor ever began a sentence with, oh, “We agree with Senator Joe McCarthy that…”, you could pretty much stop the presses right there.

But, McCarthy was right.

Johan Klaus on October 21, 2009 at 1:29 AM

The complaint you’ll get from a lefty is “but McCarthy persecuted all those innocent actors and directors!”

Idiots!

stonemeister on October 21, 2009 at 2:00 AM

Could you imagine the rancor if a Bush Czar had said something to the effect that Mussolini’s Corporate State ideas had some merit?

What’s interesting is how the Leftists have ‘nudged’ us into a position that to stand up to the Communists automatically aligns us with the extremists on the other side of the political spectrum (Nazis, Fascists, PPF, Rexists, Falangists, Quisling’s [note how even in English "Quisling" is synonymous with "traitor"] and Sir Oswald Moseley’s movements, the Vichy government, and so on).

The Fascist movements have been totally discredited in most everyone’s minds due to a combination of their arrogance and war-mongering along with healthy doses of Soviet/Leftist propaganda and Hollywood hype. What we know of the Fascists comes almost exclusively from…God knows where, actually…often film directors and Libtard historians and a good bit from the NKVD/Moscow. Their atrocities are easily accepted whereas those of the Communists’ are virtually ignored…because the victims of Communism are the forces of reaction and those that stand against the progression of the Internationale…in other words, Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Che, Castro killed those who deserved it. Those the Fascists killed were “murdered” and were all innocent civilians guilty only of their ethnicity, religion or well-meaning Lefist political activities.

Something wrong there if one takes their head out of their a$$ long enough to think for a change. We fail to boldly question the memes forced upon us by the Communists who seek to be our masters. Face it…they put our Republic and Capitalism easily into the same basket as the Nazis.

What is really under attack is our Republic, the Constitution, Jeffersonian Democracy and the ideals of our Revolution. The Fascists aren’t/weren’t down with Democracy anymore than the Communists are. Both groups embrace the belief that the intellectual and enlightened cream will rise to the top in a series of political struggles along the lines of king of the mountain…the Masses simply are too ignorant to make good choices in leadership. That’s something that the Commies have in common with Hitler.

We can acknowledge that our Republic is not perfect, and will never be, but only the relatively few countries on the planet that have embraced similar political ideals are the places where prosperity and freedom may be found.

Still, the ascendancy of a power elite in our own Republic has been accepted for far too long due to our collective sloth and Bread and Circuses mentality…maybe too much sex, drugs, rock ‘n roll, beer and self-imposed social isolationism? So the poison we’ve allowed has been exploited by the Communists.

Whatever the reason is for our present situation, it hasn’t been working for us, isn’t working for us, and I fear we’re about to get our a$$es handed to us big time.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 21, 2009 at 2:40 AM

Could you imagine the rancor if a Bush Czar had said something to the effect that Mussolini’s Corporate State ideas had some merit?
Dr. ZhivBlago on October 21, 2009 at 2:40 AM

In the North American Review in 1934, the progressive writer Roger Shaw described the New Deal as “Fascist means to gain liberal ends.” He wasn’t hallucinating. FDR’s adviser Rexford Tugwell wrote in his diary that Mussolini had done “many of the things which seem to me necessary.”

warden on October 21, 2009 at 7:42 AM

Here’s Trevor Loudon’s file on Ron Bloom. Loudon is the blogger who first exposed Van Jones. An interesting morsel to whet your appetite for more:

Much of Bloom’s childhood revolved around Habonim “a progressive Labor Zionist youth movement that emphasizes cultural Judaism, socialism and social justice.”

At age 10, Bloom was sent with his two siblings to Camp Galil, a movement-run summer camp in Pennsylvania. He returned each season for the next four years-eventually becoming a camp counselor.

Bloom recently said of his Habonim experience;

“That’s part of what I try to do in my work life…That’s one of the things that made me want to work for Obama.”

Buy Danish on October 21, 2009 at 7:56 AM

Ha! Fun times at Bloom’s Camp Galil in the Sixties protesting the Vietnam War. What a bunch of losers – they look like they’re eating Thorazine for breakfast. No wonder they rely on the government for “social justice”.

Buy Danish on October 21, 2009 at 8:55 AM

“The Fascist movements have been totally discredited in most everyone’s minds due to a combination of their arrogance and war-mongering along with healthy doses of Soviet/Leftist propaganda and Hollywood hype. What we know of the Fascists comes almost exclusively from…God knows where, actually…often film directors and Libtard historians and a good bit from the NKVD/Moscow.”

Here’s an article on just that point:

http://www.la-articles.org.uk/fascism.htm

ebrown2 on October 21, 2009 at 9:18 AM

“In the North American Review in 1934, the progressive writer Roger Shaw described the New Deal as “Fascist means to gain liberal ends.” He wasn’t hallucinating. FDR’s adviser Rexford Tugwell wrote in his diary that Mussolini had done “many of the things which seem to me necessary.”

Some of FDR’s advisors visited and wrote approvingly of the the USSR during the same period.

davod on October 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM

Not really. Political power in this country comes from the consent of the governed. It’s why we’re usually spared gunfights in the streets at election time, or firing squads for political opponents. For now, anyway.

I’d nitpick that a little bit, though. Political legitimacy comes from the consent of the governed. But the raw power itself comes from the use or threat of use of force, i.e., the barrel of a gun. If a government is popular and legitimately supported, but doesn’t have the strength or will to protect itself, it will fall, and often to a tyranny.
As an example, Saddam Hussein did not govern by consent, but by fear. And the power of the government of the United States rests on the fact that we have the ability to prevent another government from taking over.

Admittedly, a good deal of that power is indirectly related to the consent of the governed, since most people consent to paying taxes, which let us fund military and police. But this is not universally the case – in many cases, people pay out of fear.

Fundamentally, the power to govern is the ability to compel people to do things, and compelling means there is force involved – otherwise it’s not governing, its volunteering.

RINO in Name Only on October 21, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Comment pages: 1 2