Yes there is a bug somewhere and I recommend when starting threads, saving a copy of new Blog Entries for backup just in case. I think if one tries an edit while it gets stickied the bug can eat all but the beginning. I'll watch my netiquette.

In this case the bug seems to have struck without any attempt at editing going on. George's article was intact for several days; then at some point the bulk of it must have spontaneously disappeared. When I think about it, usually it's the beginning that gets eaten. Maybe the bug has mutated!

A gracious and grateful tip of the hat to the hard-working, under-appreciated Webmaster!

...for the record.

I wonder if it depends on the operating system Linz is using?

..."This is the bug our webmaster insisted was a figment of my imagination."

That's a gross misrepresentation.

I never said it was a figment of your imagination. I said it was only you who had reported it. And, I could not, despite my best efforts, reproduce the fault. Anomalies reported by Peter Cresswell and Bosch Fawstin were not the same. I received *no* other reports.

Web developers are not miracle workers. They work with the information and the *feedback* that they have.

Yes there is a bug somewhere and I recommend when starting threads, saving a copy of new Blog Entries for backup just in case. I think if one tries an edit while it gets stickied the bug can eat all but the beginning. I'll watch my netiquette.

My question is, where is the outcry against Anita Dunn? Her remarks were not limited to a casual comment that had vicious implications. Rather they constituted a prolonged, blatantly explicit, and far more fundamental endorsement of an incalculably worse person and program than did those of Trent Lott.

In the 1970s and '80s, the Left marginalized the flagrantly dishonest far Left. Call them honest liberals.

Since the Fall of Communism, that changed with the rise and acceptance of political correctness. This means the "liberals" ceased being honest, or the expectation of honesty. Instead, flagrant double standards prevail.

Being a Leftist now means never having to say "I'm sorry" for lying. That's the lesson of the failed Clinton impeachment of 1998-9. The media bought and perpetuated the the corrupt Democratic lie that "it was all about sex" because the nerdy republican investigator "Kenneth Starr" - later decamped to George Reisman's religious sponsored Pepperdine University - as obviously obsessed with rooting out sexual impropriety. Republican=guilt-ridden puritan's=scary people. And the public bought it.

So goes the media's lie.

In reality, the House Republican led Bill of Impeachment never mentions "sex" at all! And a Federal Judge (retired), later acting on behalf of the lawyer's American Bar Association, exacted the truthful penalty: President Clinton, the country's chief law enforcement officer, lied - committing perjury - to a Federal Judge, during sworn testimony. When Clinton left office, his license to practice law was suspended for a period of years.

With the GI generation too old now, and the Baby Boomers in charge of the cultural citadels, a righteous double standard is now so entrenched that only a vigorous revival of ethical reason can change the reigning double-standards of hypocrisy. Marxism and neo-Marxism is the primary vehicle sustaining this rot, as professor Reisman exposes above.

Perhaps the single most overlooked expose is this one from 1996, rightly expressed in the title: American Academia and the Survival of Marxist Ideas, by Darío Fernández-Morera.

The best source of hope in the US are the bold talk show hosts who identify Obama as a Marxist, like Glenn Beck and Mark Levin, whose best-selling book "Liberty and Tyranny" has sold over a million copies. Others, like Yale Law School classmate of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Michael Medved, blanch at going so far. Sadly.

To reach the strongest Obamacide supporters, the young, those under 30 years old, need re-education. The best place to start is with culture. My favorite is "thepeoplescube.com" - a libertarian web-site devoted to political educational satire. With graphics like this

Obama's Evil Twin. And "Organizing For Better National-Socialist Health Care", for instance. Tools to enlighten the ignorant and naive young, the demographic most susceptible to populist propaganda. the last graphic is simply BRILLIANT!

If the text drops off like that, don't just post it. Let me know. This is the bug our webmaster insisted was a figment of my imagination.

This last June, at a high-school commencement exercise, Dunn had this to say:

“… the third lesson and tip actually comes from two of my favorite political philosophers Mao Tse Tung and Mother Teresa, not often coupled with each other, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to have make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not…. In 1947, when Mao Tse Tung was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-Shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this, how can you do this against all of the odds against you, and Mao Tze Tung said, you fight your war and I’ll fight mine.” (Dunn’s remarks appear in an online video at http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes...)

Back in late 2002, on the occasion of retiring Senator’s Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday, Trent Lott, then the Majority Leader of the US Senate, said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either." (See http://archives.cnn.com/2002/A...)

Because Thurmond had campaigned in 1948 on a platform advocating racial segregation and Lott’s statement was—correctly—taken as an implicit endorsement of segregation, the result of his statement was an outcry from the media, various public figures, and other Senators, of such dimensions that he was soon forced to resign as Senate Majority Leader.

This was despite his protestation and apology that “A poor choice of words conveyed to some the impression that I embraced the discarded policies of the past. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I apologize to anyone who was offended by my statement." Thurmond had subsequently abandoned his segregationist position and, consistent with this, Lott said, "My comments were not an endorsement of his positions of over 50 years ago, but of the man and his life."

Nevertheless, perhaps there simply was no valid explanation or justification for Lott’s comment, and his resignation, therefore, was appropriate. But at least Lott was greatly embarrassed by what he had said and did offer a public apology of some kind.

My question is, where is the outcry against Anita Dunn? Her remarks were not limited to a casual comment that had vicious implications. Rather they constituted a prolonged, blatantly explicit, and far more fundamental endorsement of an incalculably worse person and program than did those of Trent Lott. She has dared to say that one of her “favorite political philosophers” is one of the greatest mass murderers in the history of the world, a man whose takeover of China was responsible for as many as 70 million deaths during his reign. She has dared to present the words of this monster as a source of inspiration to youth!

Perhaps she would like to rephrase her remarks. Perhaps she would like to substitute Adolf Hitler for Mao Tse Tung. Perhaps she would like to say something like this:

“In the days when the Führer was being challenged even within his own party on his plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe, the Jews and their allies controlled many major businesses, they controlled many major banks, they owned many major newspapers and magazines. They were protected by the rule of law, by trial by jury, and by laws against robbery, kidnapping, and murder. They had everything on their side and people said to Hitler how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this, how can you do this against all of the odds against you, and Hitler said, you fight your war and do your destruction and I’ll fight mine and do my destruction.”

If the United States had an honest press and media, one committed to the principle of individual rights, their outrage would drive Anita Dunn out of Washington, D.C. just by hurling her words back at her. They would make her such a “hot potato” that no one would dare to defend her in her infamy.

Copyright © 2009 by George Reisman. George Reisman, Ph.D. is the author of Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics (Ottawa, Illinois: Jameson Books, 1996) and is Pepperdine University Professor Emeritus of Economics. He is also a Senior Fellow at the Goldwater Institute. His web site is www.capitalism.net and his blog is www.georgereisman.com/blog/. A pdf replica of his book can be downloaded to the reader’s hard drive simply by clicking on the book’s title, above, and then saving the file when it appears on the screen.

It's amazing how socialistic many of President Obama's personal and political friends and allies are. Does Obama know and like even a single libertarian?

Reisman would be the best Secretary of the Treasury that the United States ever had. Just some wishful thinking on my part...