moonbattery.gif


« Comrade Obama Accuses Doctors of Basing All Decisions on Profits | Main | Daniel Suelo, Hippie Caveman »


July 23, 2009

Cass Sunstein: Yet Another Wacky Totalitarian Czar

What a coincidence — another one of Chairman Zero's "Czars" just happens to be a totalitarian screwball. Cass Sunstein is the Moonbat Messiah's pick for Regulatory Czar. Considering the mountains of extraneous regulations that accrue in the District of Criminals with each passing day, he'll have many opportunities to apply his ideology. Knowledge Is Power introduces us to his point of view.

Sunstain believes in "libertarian paternalism." This phrase means that statists plan to do to the word libertarian what they did to the word liberal. Here's how Buttstain explains it:

The idea of libertarian paternalism might seem to be an oxymoron, but it is both possible and legitimate for private and public institutions to affect behavior while also respecting freedom of choice. Often people's preferences are ill-formed, and their choices will inevitably be influenced by default rules, framing effects, and starting points. In these circumstances, a form of paternalism cannot be avoided. Equipped with an understanding of behavioral findings of bounded rationality and bounded self-control, libertarian paternalists should attempt to steer people's choices in welfare-promoting directions without eliminating freedom of choice. It is also possible to show how a libertarian paternalist might select among the possible options and to assess how much choice to offer.

In other words, our authoritarian masters will be "libertarian" by letting us decide if we want our cot on the left side of the cell or the right side.

Cass gets even wackier:

[R]epresentatives of animals should be able to bring private suits to ensure that anticruelty and related laws are actually enforced. Of course, any animals would be represented by human beings, just like any other litigant who lacks ordinary (human) competence; for example, the interests of children are protected by prosecutors, and also by trustees and guardians in private litigation brought on children's behalf. … If getting rid of the idea that animals are property is helpful in reducing suffering, then we should get rid of the idea that animals are property.

If the government is going to treat citizens like farm animals, why shouldn't animals be treated like citizens? Sorry, hunters!

This sounds especially ominous:

The cruel and abusive practices generally involved in contemporary farming are largely unregulated at the state level.

Now might be a good time to start stockpiling food. Maybe next week's crisis requiring immediate draconian legislation will be animal oppression, solvable only by federal seizure of all farms. Something similar kept Stalin in power for a generation.

Unsurprisingly, Ass doesn't like the Internet:

We hardly need to imagine a world, however, in which people and institutions are being harmed by the rapid spread of damaging falsehoods via the Internet. We live in that world. What might be done to reduce the harm?

Let me guess: Regulate online communication.

Sure enough, Sunstein thinks bloggers should be held punishable for anything any commenter says that can't be proven to be true. FDR killed the Tenth Amendment; this Ivy League cockroach might help Chairman Zero do the same to the First.

cass-sunstein.jpg
What could be more humiliating than this twerp's loafer on our faces?

On a tip from V the K.

Posted by Van Helsing at July 23, 2009 7:37 AM

Comments

"it is both possible and legitimate for private and public institutions to affect behavior - It is also possible to show how a libertarian paternalist might select among the possible options and to assess how much choice to offer."

What he's describing here is also known as "fascism".

Posted by: forest at July 23, 2009 8:05 AM

This Klown should remove the C from his first name.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 23, 2009 8:31 AM

Just like Jonah Goldberg said, Fascism will manifest itself in the US as being benevolent with a smiling familiar happy face. (a wimpy yuppie)

Posted by: Worst of Gallstone at July 23, 2009 8:37 AM

When is Comrade Obama going to appoint a Czar Czar?

Posted by: Graycat at July 23, 2009 8:38 AM

How dare he hijack and smear the word Libertarian!!!!

Posted by: Contrarian_Libertarian at July 23, 2009 8:44 AM

Liberals love to play childish language games. It's not surprising that they'd attempt to hijack the word Libertarian.

Posted by: J at July 23, 2009 8:54 AM

Wait, it gets better. He's married to Samantha Power. A Jew married to an anti-Semite: must make for some interesting marital spats.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 23, 2009 9:09 AM

I took classes with him when I was in grad school at the Univ of Chicago. He is moonbat bordering on insane. He make Al Gore seem like Barry Goldwater.

Posted by: mega at July 23, 2009 9:14 AM

Graycat: I guess he would if CzarCzar Gabor was still alive.

Posted by: Worst of Gallstone at July 23, 2009 9:58 AM

Egad.

Now I'm getting some serious scaredy shakes.

Does anyone know just what exactly a Regulatory Czar regulates?

Posted by: MoogieP at July 23, 2009 9:59 AM

Does anyone know just what exactly a Regulatory Czar regulates?

Everything.

And I'm not being facetious.

Do a web search, see for yourself, and be amazed.

Posted by: mega at July 23, 2009 10:01 AM

...libertarian paternalists should attempt to steer people's choices in welfare-promoting directions without eliminating freedom of choice.

And when certain people refuse to be "steered", then what? No problem, as he offers the remedy in the very next sentence:

It is also possible to show how a libertarian paternalist might select among the possible options and to assess how much choice to offer.

So if you can't steer people toward the choice you approve of, then you'll start eliminating the other choices.

Posted by: GeronimoRumplestiltskin at July 23, 2009 10:10 AM

Of course, on Cass Insane's 'Animal Farm' all animals are equal... but some are more equal than others.

Like him.

Posted by: Jack Bauer at July 23, 2009 10:49 AM

Regulatory Czar eh?...

For example, isn't the Energy Czar supposed to be the "regulator" of, you know, energy policies?

So now we have a supreme regulatory leader that supercedes all other czars?

If I had money (go go unemployment because I'm not a minority, nor am I a female... I'm a college-educated, conservative, caucasian male), I'd be arming myself for the inevitable.

Posted by: AmericanToTheCore at July 23, 2009 10:57 AM

No no, Mama Cass... you are no more a libertarian that my left foot is an Irish novelist who your ilk would prefer to have seen aborted...

You are, like that dimwit Bill Maher, a libertine socialist.

Posted by: Jack Bauer at July 23, 2009 11:31 AM

So ...we're to be free to choose among the options our betters allow us to have, once they've eliminated the ones we're too stupid to realize are against our interest?

Is that about right?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 23, 2009 11:36 AM

More liberaal doofuses like JACKASS SUNSWINE and other members of the OBAMA GANG OF SCOUNDRELS

Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at July 23, 2009 11:40 AM

He looks like the kind of repressed little girl that would wear a sweater with the sleeves tied around his neck. I do NOT concede him any authority over me. Libertarian indeed.

Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at July 23, 2009 2:30 PM

I met this fellow one time when he was younger, back in the late 70's when he was fresh out of Harvard law school. Y'all might be surprised to learn that he's a pretty tough physically, but, I'll have to admit, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Back then I was duck hunting on some public land in Kansas and had just finished jumping some ducks on a pond one morning and was about to pick one up I just killed when he pulls up with this other hippee fellow in a pink Ford Pinto. We'll the first thing he does is preach to me how he's this big shot Haarvaad lawyer, how much smarter he was than some stupid hick like me, and claims that I'm in a heap of trouble because I somehow illegally shot the duck and how he was going to take it in as evidence of my cruelty to animals to the local authorities and some mumbo jumbo about him representing the duck in a civil suit against me.

Seeing that he was from Haavaad, and really agitated, I told this young turd that the way we settle disputes around these parts about who had the right to the killed animal is that we each get 3 turns kicking the other guy in the rear, and we continue on until the last one who can stand up wins. Well, I guess he looked at me, some 30 years older and in my 50's than him then, and thought to himself, I'll take this old man any day -- so he said sure. I said ok, I'll go first, to which he obliged. So he bent over first and squared up and launched one with my steel-toed boot square from behind that caught him square in the nuts as it rose up. He fell down, turned purple and gasped in pain. (I failed to mention to him that I was an All-State field goal kicker in high school and had a state record that still stood in that day of 62 yards). Then his hippee buddy picked him back up and I kicked him again, as hard as I could, this time lifting his scrawny ass a full 3 feet off the ground before he collapsed. Again, his buddy helped him up, and again I did a running start and launched him about 10 yards horizontally, when he fell face first into a briar patch. After a few minutes he regained consciouness and staggered over to me and says, alright you old bastard, that's 3 kicks, now it's my turn now. To which, I replied, that's ok fella, you can have the duck.

Posted by: Clingtomyguns at July 23, 2009 2:32 PM

HeeHeeHee Clingto, that's a good one -- I'm sure you and the NRA have even more things to love about about this sack-of-crap libtard, considering he is in favor of taking your guns away, just like Sotomayor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein

"[Sundon'tshine] calls an understanding of the 2nd amendment that guarantees the individual right to bear arms “an apparently fraudulent interpretation pushed by ‘special interest groups,’”[15] claiming that such groups “use the Constitution, however implausibly invoked, in order to give a veneer of principle and respectability to arguments that would otherwise seem hopelessly partisan and self-interested.”[16] Commenting on the D.C. v. Heller decision he said, “The Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of an individual’s right to bear arms for military purposes was not really a statement on behalf of the Constitution, as it was written by those long dead; it was based on judgments that are now widespread among the living.”[17] He also questions whether the 2nd amendment is applicable to the states:

Does the Second Amendment apply to the states? By its plain terms, the original Bill of Rights applies only to the national government. To be sure, most (but not all) of the listed rights are now understood to have been "incorporated" in the Fourteenth Amendment and made applicable to the states through that route. But is the Second Amendment incorporated as well?"

Posted by: GhostofJournalism at July 23, 2009 2:52 PM

Graycat, I think that's what Obama's de-facto position is.

Posted by: I'm A Lasagna Hog at July 23, 2009 2:58 PM

Is it me, or does he look in that photo like he's just leaving a bathhouse?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 23, 2009 7:39 PM

Sure enough, Sunstein thinks bloggers should be held punishable for anything any commenter says that can't be proven to be true. FDR killed the Tenth Amendment; this Ivy League cockroach might help Chairman Zero do the same to the First.

Let's help change his mind by filling his own personal blog with every conspiracy theory in the book.

Posted by: BURNING HOT at July 23, 2009 10:06 PM

Often people's preferences are ill-formed...

According to who?

Is it just me or does this seem to be a recurring theme among Democrats (including the preznit) -- that government is better equipped than individuals to make 'welfare-promoting' choices, and should be able to mandate that individuals make choices that promote their welfare in the first place?

No wonder the 2nd amendment scares the living crap out of them.

Posted by: mandible claw at July 24, 2009 12:01 AM

Enjoyed the article on "Cass Sunstein: Yet Another Wacky Totalitarian Czar"; BUT did not see any cites for the Sunstein quotes that appeared in light blue. Are they true? If so, where can I verify them?

SF

Posted by: Steve Ferris at August 7, 2009 1:28 PM