Are both major US political parties fascist?



Facebook debates can sometimes turn into good blog posts. This is one.

A liberal friend posted a picture of Obama/Biden with the following caption: “If you really want change, give us a Congress.”  I quickly pointed out the Democrats enjoyed a majority in both chambers for the first 2 years of Obama’s term. The back and forth continued with my friend-foe citing things such as the majority being made up of too many blue-dogs and me retorting that these are just excuses.

Finally, I asked why Clinton was able to get things done without a majority but Obama cannot.  The answer given was, “Clinton was dealing with Republicans.  These guys are Fascists.”

To this I quipped, “another excuse”, but my friend insisted this was a legitimate fact by posting a link to a definition of ‘fascism’ from .  Now, I’ve never heard of com , so I took a look, crafted the following response:

There is a divide between our thinking I fear can never be rectified. I have a few links of my own to share  showing how Democrats fit the bullet points of Fascism very nicely–and I didn’t even have to go to Fox News to get them.  I doubt you will agree, but it may give you another perspective.

1. Rampant Sexism – Obama appointee Janet Napolitano has her hands full with accusations of running the Department of Homeland Security like a female-run frat house with favoritism towards her female friends:

2. Controlled Mass Media – By a 5-1 margin, people believe Obama has the mass media in his pocket. Obama is the undisputed mass-media-darling:

3. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Obama favorites received a vast majority of stimulus cash, regardless if it was a good bet or not. For example: Solyndra (lost hundreds of millions), Pfizer & PhRMA (ran pro-Obamacare ads in return for favorable BigPharm regs), First Solar (received money to buy its own products), NRG Energy (a Harry Reid favorite), etc:

4. More Corruption – In Obama’s own Democratically controlled political home state of Illinois, 4 Governors in as many decades have been put in jail:

5. Scapegoats – Obama reigns supreme in the ability to point the finger away from his own responsibility in matters of leadership. He has blamed everyone and everything from Wall Street, the EU, Japan, Arab Spring, the wealthy, big oil, oil speculators to GW Bush.  His present favorite scapegoat is obstructionist Republicans. The Democratically controlled Senate has not passed a budget in four years. The President’s budget was such a joke it wasn’t taken seriously by anyone and was voted down 97-0 in that Democratic Senate. That was not Republican Obstructionism.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

In an attempt to find some common ground, hopefully you can agree with this:

Let’s be honest. Neither party is immune to these kinds of mud-slinging accusations. Few, if any, of our current prominent leaders got where they are without bending a few rules. I don’t like it any more than you, but this is the losing hand we the people have been dealt.

I just want to see Washington do its job! Not the job that raises campaign funds, increases personal popularity, divides along racial lines, socio-economic lines or the job that gets them re-elected…no, I want them to do the job outlined in our founding documents, chiefly, the Constitution.

If we really want change, we have to get rid of career politicians altogether.

[UPDATE]: This post was revised several times after publication as it was errantly published while still in ‘draft’.  The most substantive edit was the removal of a claim that all  recently jailed Illinois governors were Democrats.


  1. Yet again I feel compelled to respond:

    First, George Ryan was a Republican.

    Second, that last paragraph makes me want to know how you stand on Citizens United, gerrymandering, and term limits.

    Throw the bums out is not an answer. Repeating the cry to get rid of career politicians only serves to lower the level of civil discourse to push an agenda. It’s not a good idea and here’s one illustration why. China. China thinks in terms of decades and centuries. Their leaders plan and implement ideas to position their country over a 100 years while our politicians worry about the next cycle and whether the work they did will be undone should they loose the election. We need career politicians who can look long term, who can lead our congressional committees long term, and who have vision for the long term, past the next 4 years.

    Another illustration: When our military engaged al-Qaeda, we hunted their leaders. We did this for a number of reasons and among those was to try to dismantle the enemy. In military speak it’s sometimes called decapitation…cut off the head of the snake. The reverse situation also holds true. By getting rid of career politicians we’d be doing exactly what our enemies would like to do to us, only we’re doing it to ourselves, and, on purpose. We’d be achieving our enemies objective for them.

    Still, what do we do about the fact that congressional approval ratings are near record lows, yet, incumbency remains high? I’ve made the case for career politicians but I also believe incumbency is too high. We have to get the money out of politics, fix Citizens United, fix gerrymandering, and reduce incumbency, but, not to near zero levels. Really, anything less than 25% scares me a bit.

    Yes, corruption is everywhere and in both parties and I appreciate your acknowledgement of such. Hold on…where did I put my political satirist’s hat…oh, here it is…But, how hard is that admission really? It doesn’t take great wisdom or vision to see that the same symptom can come from two different sources of a problem. It’s like saying sure beans give me gas, but so does broccoli. Ok, the hat’s off now and safely back in its box…I would like to see a raising of the level of civil discourse instead of feeding it. Oh, and check your facts.

    • Thank you for the suggestion to post about Citizen’s United, gerrymandering, etc. Watch out for something on at least one of those in the coming weeks.

      ‘Throw the bums’ is an oversimplification of what I would endorse as a solution (and this was admittedly not expanded upon). I completely agree with the notion that we cannot replace all our leaders at once. Sometimes I like to end a post with food for thought, a teaser if you will, something to leave the reader wanting more. Seems it worked a little too well in this case :) I like to believe there are ways of getting rid of career politicians without removing them all at once. A staggered approach to term limits where ‘new blood’ is cycled through could work. The initial roll out of such a plan would aslo have to be staggered in some way, maybe even some kind of grandfathering to avoid a total lapse in continuity of government would be prudent. Your suggestion that getting the money out of politics is also key to solving the problem.

      This post wasn’t written as some kind of revelation that politicians in both parties engage in corruption. It was a response to a charge that Republicans are fascists. The definition cited by the person making the charge includes corruption, which indeed exists in both parties. A point of the article is if we use the definition of corruption, both parties are guilty. Using the word fascist to describe the US political system certainly comes as a shock or revelation to some. At least it did for the person making the initial charge.

      This post was revised several times prior to seeing your comment as it was errantly published while still in ‘draft’. The post was indeed revised to remove a claim that all the recently jailed Illinois governors were Democrats–also prior to seeing your comment (for whatever that is worth). Aside from the opinions other points are cited, so the perhaps the Washington Post, Rasmussen Reports and NY Daily News have a fact-checking problem.

      • Amen! I like this reply. I don’t care for the kind of discourse your liberal friend is spreading. It’s not helpful to throw this kind of rhetoric around and this reply post is well reasoned and thoughtful.

        For me, this reply post is the way to fight fire, with thought out, well reasoned facts or opinions. Simply saying, “yeah, well, you guys do it too,” isn’t good enough.

        Thanks for clarifying the revisions and drafts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56 other followers

%d bloggers like this: