Ideological Pyromaniacs

One of the enduring political images of the past two-and-a-half years–an image that has become even more pronounced since the nature of this administration’s radical agenda increasingly revealed itself–is that of then-Sen. Barack Obama as the Joker from the latest incarnation of the Batman film franchise.  There are some people who don’t quite understand the rationale for the image, but it’s actually rather simple.

First, without delving into a first-year film class lecture, suffice it to say that the latest run of Caped Crusader flicks is just one of more and more conservatively-themed movies that are emerging from Tinseltown.  Second, it’s important to understand that the image of Barack Obama as the Joker is not so much specific to him as it is a much more general metaphor for the far Left.  As I stated in my book:

The Joker, for all the destruction that he caused and the great lengths to which he went to plan and carry it out, ultimately never had an endgame.  His only truly realized satisfaction came when (1) he managed to expose the limits of the law or (2) he managed to show that those who defended the law – i.e. Harvey Dent – could be broken and turned against it.  There was nothing substantive that, in the end, motivated him other than the pleasure of wreaking havoc on the abstraction of law.  His ‘payment’ was, in essence, watching the system burn.

A scene from the movie that took place in a hospital, featuring the interaction between Two-Face and the Joker, might help to illustrate the point that I hope to drive home.  As it is not capable of being embedded, watch it by clicking HERE.

Now, remove yourself from motion picture escapism for a moment, and look at the world around you.  London is burning, and I fear that there are leftist-anarchists in our midst who are watching the events overseas like Bill Belichek breaks down film preparing for the Patriots’ next game.  While the alleged reason for the fires burning parts of London to the ground is the shooting and killing by law enforcement of a drug dealer who had been in their sights for some time, that incident has only served as a catalyst, providing an avenue for the manifestation of something else altogether.

For some, it was the shooting that motivated the outcry.  For others, it was driven by the Prime Minister’s attempts to put through austerity measures in an effort to save England’s economy — measures which, naturally, cut into the cultural narcotic of entitlement benefits.  For a whole lot of others, however, the shooting and subsequent frustration provided the opportunity to simply go out and “have some fun,” in the process destroying the lives of people who have prospered more than they themselves have.  After all, one girl involved in all the “fun,” interviewed by a local news agency, claimed that “we’re going to show the rich people that we can do what we want — you know … all the small business owners.”

The nerve of those people — running a successful business unattached to the government.  Just who do they think they are?

It’s this third group that concerns me the most, young people who have absolutely no clue as to what’s actually going on in the world nor do they care, young people who have grown up essentially hooked to an intravenous line of counter-cultural, aimless, contrarian perspective and behavior.  These are the people on whom the people with the real politically-destructive intent–the global Left–depend to do their cultural razing.  I would imagine that somewhere in the United States, Francis Fox Piven is watching the tape of the London riots like it is pornography.

Like the Joker, Leftists and Liberals just “do things” without any thought to actual consequences.  Watching Barack Obama and Timothy “Turbo Tax” Geithner try to tell us that Standard & Poors “got it wrong” was not at all surprising to any of us who truly pay attention and can actually predict the behavioral patterns of Liberals and children at this point.  Take away all the political nonsense, and the two of them were doing nothing more than saying, “it’s not my fault.”

I can tell you this: as the primary disciplinarian in an all-boy’s Catholic college prep high school, I wish I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard those words.  If that were the case, I’d singlehandedly be able to put a dent in the deficit.

Truth be told, maybe the president and Secretary Geithner are technically correct.  Perhaps S&P shouldn’t have downgraded us based solely on pure mathematical logic.  Still, our two “leaders” seem to have missed the point entirely — from my way of thinking, S&P was merely using common sense and was looking at the big picture.  This was their generalized way of their telling us to wake up.

As more and more people have come to see over the course of the past two-and-a-half years, we’re dealing with adolescents — and spoiled ones at that, children who see no point to consequences and behave more like chic, pseudo-intellectual collegiate free-spirits who live only to impress their other ultra-chic friends with the degree to which they’re so “above the fray.”

Consequently, it’s very easy to understand the reasons for the assaultive bias of what remains of the integrity of the mainstream media.  These are most likely–perhaps not all, but certainly a substantive number–people who came from money, never had any real boundaries imposed upon them by their parents, and as young “adults” attended “elite” universities that were really nothing more than centers of personal, no-holds-barred personal gratification and degradation and chic, leftist,  ”intellectual,” fighting-the-man and pitying “the workers of the world” indoctrination.  Think about some of the people who write seemingly outrageous op-eds for the likes of the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, Time Magazine, Newsweek, etc., etc.  Think these writers are paid any extra for fanning flames?  I’d bet not; no, I think their real “payment” comes in impressing their chic, elitist friends with the degree to which they put into words completely counter-cultural things and helping to “burn the system to the ground.”

For Heaven’s sake, Cokie Roberts claimed on national television this past Sunday morning that “the problem we have here is the United States Constitution.”

Do you think she’s not getting pats on the back by others in the Beltway and media cocktail circuit for that one?  That must have really excited her friends.  For Cokie, it must been a quality “high” to say something so asinine.  It must have felt so rebellious.

All of which brings me back to the riots in London.  If people in mainstream America think that such riots will never happen here, they’re sadly mistaken.  On the contrary, there are people here who not only hope that it happens but who are also no doubt planning it.  The “Day of Rage” (that’s just soooo 1968, isn’t it?) scheduled for September 17, 2011 comes to mind, a day when the Communist Party USA plans to “take down Wall Street.”  I think we can all agree that there are some rather nefarious characters in this nation’s high-financial structure, but destroying things in a blind rage doesn’t really strike me as the best way to bring about change.

The people involved in these types of things–mostly young people–are those who, as a result of some or all of the reasons that I’ve discussed, want to burn America to the ground, not even microscopically aware that they’re destroying their own lives in the process.  When it all comes out in the wash, what we’re seeing is that the leftist ideology is one of destruction of all types, while the common sense values of those on the right represent an ideology of creation.

Events in America are beginning to move quickly now, as many of us foresaw as a result of the 2010 elections.  The national debt has essentially reached the point of critical mass, our nation has been downgraded economically for the first time in its history, John Kerry is flatly calling for censorship of American citizens, Kerry and David Axelrod are continuing to “repeat the lie” in an effort to attach the terms “Tea Party” and “Downgrade” in the minds of those who pay zero attention to what’s going around them and/or in the minds of those who pay zero income taxes (most often, that’s the same group of folks), and major political players in the Democratic Party of our own government are referring to a segment of some of its own citizens as terrorists, when they won’t dare refer to any Muslim extremist as such.

Common sense liberals really need to look in the mirror.  You’re on the wrong side.

Place all of this up against the fact that the unions basically went down in flames in the Wisconsin recall elections yesterday, and it’s clear that their one chance–they’ll never again have the opportunity to “fundamentally transform the United States of America”–is quickly headed to the incinerator as well.

At the beginning of this article, I used the political metaphors and statements that are obviously so much a part of the film The Dark Knight in an effort to introduce my larger points.  Another clip from the movie, I feel, provides an adequate closing for this piece.  Watch it by clicking here:

The Dark Knight – Some Men Just Want To Watch The World Burn



  1. So the Commies want to take down the U.S. on the anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution. Classy.

    Fantastic analysis John. Well done.

    I propose a new amendment: Those who pay no income and/or property taxes don’t get to vote.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Bored British Muslims, deadlier than V-1 buzz bombs and V-2 rockets.
    London burns once again. P I T I F U L.

  3. whats_up says:

    @ John Feeny

    “while the common sense values of those on the right”

    Seriously? Do you mean the common sense of intentionally defaulting on our obligations as a country? Obligations that the Constitution madates we pay? Thats your common sense. Raise prices on everyone? This is good how?

    Do you mean the common sense of trying to get out of debt by never raising taxes? You mean that common sense?

    Do you mean the common sense of giving the wealthiest corporations tax breaks, I mean after all they are only making billions of dollars? Do you mean that common sense?

    Do you mean the common sense of wanting to change the Constitution to deliberatly withhold marriage to American citizens based on your narrow version of how things should be? That common sense?

    Perhaps you mean the common sense of if we give the wealthies among us more tax breaks, they will create jobs, despite the fact that we having been doing that for ten years and they have yet to create those jobs? Do you mean that common sense?

    Perhaps you meant the common sense about not simply making things up and then spreading them as facts? Do you mean that common sense?

    I have looked in the mirror and can safely say that I am on the “right” side.

    Thanks so much for that lesson on “common sense” hit me up again as soon as Conservatives have found some.

  4. John Feeny says:

    What’s Up –
    I’ve missed you, too.

  5. Randy Wills says:

    To “whats-up”:

    Actually, I would answer “yes” to most of your questions.

    We were never in danger of defaulting on our debt, and holding fast to cutting future spending rather than using tax increases to solve a spending problem for the sake of our children and grandchildren makes sense to me. Without the “intransigence” of those Tea Party Terrorists”, the only song that the Democrats and Obama can sing is “More Taxes, Please” while 50% of Americans pay no income taxes whatsoever.

    And where in the Constitution or moral law does it give one class of persons the right to take from another class simply because that serves their ideological purposes? I am not rich; never have been, never will be, but I can find no logical or moral basis for taking an unequal amount from any given group or class of persons. My financial status in life is a matter between me and God and I have no expectations that anyone else, regardless of their wealth, has a duty to contribute to it

    As for “giving the wealthiest corporations tax breaks”, as far as I’m concerned, taxing Type “C” corporations on their profits is immoral and confiscatory. Those profits, if not returned to the shareholders, on which they will pay tax, should be available to plough back into the business. Corporations pay more than their share of local taxes and the wages that they pay is taxed to the hilt by the various government entities. What rationale is there for taxing any flow of dollars which does not accrue to the benefit of individuals? I am a founder and officer of an “S-corp” and all shareholders pay taxes on the profits, whether or not we choose to distribute it, simply because it accrues to the benefit of the shareholders at the conclusion of each fiscal year. However, with “C-corps” we seem to think that it’s the government’s right to double tax their profits; first when the corporation files their financial report, and secondly, when it is returned to the shareholders and reported as personal income. Any one who rails against the “evil corporations” making obscene profits has no basis in logic or reality for that argument.

    In an effort to not wear out my welcome, I would say the the only rhetorical question that you ask that I would answer “no” to is your contention that persons such as myself “make (ing) things up and spread(ing) them as facts”. I think that I can logically and factually defend myself against any such assertions based on “the laws of nature and nature’s God” as Jefferson said.


  6. Gail B. says:

    Randy, do you really think you can expect a leftist to understand common sense, even when it is spelled out (slowly) for him?

    What Obama is doing to this country, with the help of his Progressives, is downright criminal.

    Obama talks out of both sides of his mouth. First he tells Eric Holder not to prosecute CAIR, and then he turns around and says that the 11th Circuit’s finding of the individual mandate for public healthcare as unconstitutional — is unconstitutional. Holder won’t prosecute the Black Panthers.

    The Democrats have not passed a budget in over two years, so it is obvious that they have no clue how much they can spend. So spend they did; and because people with economic savvy demand that spending be drastically cut — as a corrective measure for far too much government waste and spending, Obama whines that taxes must be raised and the debt ceiling raised. The Democrats have been in control; why did they allow this to happen?

    The Progressives are out to ruin this country, and they have to blame it on someone!

  7. Gail B. says:

    Great article, John. You threw me off balance when you made reference to your book. I had not looked to see whose article it was.

    “I didn’t know Jeff had written a book!” Then I saw it was yours. Bottom line — when someone writes so well that I think Jeff is behind it, they have done well indeed!

  8. Dee says:

    John, great article. I have to agree with you and Randy. “whats_up” who do you think creates jobs, other than our expanding government? I have never seen a poor person or a failing company create jobs. We could all become government workers if they continue to take over businesses. Then we would have the “working class” and the government elite. If I don’t earn the money, it’s not mine and I don’t want it.
    Thanks to all who comment and let me know that I am not alone. Thanks to “whats_up” for keeping me thinking.


  1. [...] Sure, the violence may have started following the shooting, but it quickly became a conduit for much, much more.  A great piece on the roots of the UK riots can be found right here at America’s Right, by editor John Feeny.  Check out Ideological Pyromaniacs: London & The Left. [...]

Speak Your Mind