The Left Narrative in full Glory

In time I am pretty sure that the Romney vs. Obama dog love festival will be less than a footnote in history a decade from now, mostly due to general disinterest.  Of course, the mainstream media will do its part to help, by erasing it from their archives.  The true Right is already doing that at Reason, apparently for different reasons.

Here are a couple of videos I created about the Obama eating dog event.  What is interesting is the comments from an Obama supporter that showed up in response to the short video (included my comments too):

• A 10 year old child is served a meal which is common in the country he is living. Big deal. Romney, a grown man, knowingly commits an act of cruelty. The dog crapped all over the place and they still kept him up there? Duh!

  liberalmann 1 day ago
• You Leftoids are hilarious! If Obama chased the dog down himself, skinned, cooked, and ate it, giving the pelt to his mother as a shawl you would still say sticking a dog in a carrier is worse. Keep it up and don't miss the Seinfeld Lost Episode now linked to in the video!

  JohnTagliaferro in reply to liberalmann (Show the comment) 1 day ago 3
• Obama was 6 years old, you moron. How old was Romney when he casually committed animal cruelty? This is true Romney, an out of touch blue blood and a narcissist.

  liberalmann in reply to JohnTagliaferro (Show the comment) 8 hours ago
• Safe transport of a dog is "casually committed an act of cruelty" to you. Check.  You don't know the meaning of the words you use, just like your name calling.

  JohnTagliaferro in reply to liberalmann (Show the comment) 24 minutes ago  

Another subthread:

• If Obama eats dog, I wonder what kind of meat does Michelle like?

  SdGkbqrwxB 1 day ago 3
• She prefers her arugula flavored: wouldyoulikeborderswiththatsoc­ialism.blogspot.com/search/lab­el/Condoms

  JohnTagliaferro in reply to SdGkbqrwxB (Show the comment) 1 day ago 3
• Eventually all loony wingnuts reveal not only their severe lack of intelligence but their true rotten core.

  liberalmann in reply to JohnTagliaferro 8 hours ago  

If this were a discussion in person, there is little doubt that "liberalmann" would be on the verge of throwing food at this point. Throwing food is the ultimate expression of deep ideas for the Leftist.

The "Seinfeld Lost Episode" mentioned above:

Side note: If you want Leftoid comments, make your video very short. If you are trying to get libertarians or people of the true right to watch it, make it long. Just look at the stats and comments on the videos in my channel and see.

Libertarians in Media are clueless about the military

Gun Toting Socialist, David Weigel

There's no warfare like class warfare.

One of the sad things about the true Right, which includes libertarians, is the utter absence of military knowledge in the ranks of their scribes.  It is not an issue that many of us with decades of military experience are not libertarian, no it is just odd that magazines like Reason cannot manage to assign a single story that relates to the military to anybody with a day's worth of experience in uniform.  Worse than that, a basic item of being libertarian in America is actually knowing what is in the US Constitution.  This works out great when libertarians publish articles about marijuana legalization or abuses of police power, but they seem to have skipped Article 1, Section 8 when topics like Marines badmouthing the Commander-In-Chief pop up.

In his latest David Weigel impression, Mike Riggs tosses this bit of class warfare into the cloud:

Mike Riggs, David Weigel Impersonator

Dissenting While Enlisted Will Get You Fired, Dissenting While Commanding Gets You Retired

Riggs tosses out the false comparison between the treatment of a General who illegally badmouthed Vice President Biden and was summarily retired, with the treatment of a Marine Sergeant who was discharged, with nine years of service, for badmouthing the President.


Article 1, Section 8, states in part:

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

The Congress is empowered, actually commanded by the States to regulate the affairs of military people in a manner that they cannot do to civilians through the "organizing, arming, and disciplining" portion of the document that most libertarians hold dear.

In this case, it is a simple principle that crosses both government service and private employment grounds: badmouthing the boss can have severe consequences.  On a related point, Riggs' lack of knowledge is telling:

Could those remarks be interpreted as "prejudicial to good order and discipline"? I guess that depends on your rank. They were bad enough that Obama told McChrystal to resign or be fired, but they weren't bad enough for McChrystal to be discharged. 


Riggs' concept of what "be fired" means for a soldier amounts to getting a transfer to a new department, or being moved to a smaller office, like some screwup at the EPA.  Not the case.  Be fired means getting booted from the service, but it usually does not mean losing one's pension.

I know a retired Command Sergeant Major who was famous for this with the senior NCOs within his domain for infractions arguably much more severe than this, usually dereliction of duty related violations.  He would show up where the NCO was supposed to be working, knowing full well that they would not be there, track the NCO down and shove a resignation letter and a list of charges before the NCO, giving the NCO his choice of retiring or fighting the charges.  They always chose retirement.


Additionally, Riggs appears to be under the impression that a Sergeant got screwed out of a retirement check.  As most all Service Members know (as well as many other people), you are not eligible for retirement after only nine years of service.  If this Marine had 20 good years of service, odds are overwhelming that he would have been forced out as a retiree, just like the General.  Fact is, he was not even half-way to retirement so the point is moot.

Another factor here is the liberaltarian leanings of Reason magazine.  Their writers and readers tend to have the same attitude toward the US Military as college Liberal Arts professors and their fellow travelers at The Daily Worker, The Nation, Slate and MSNBC.
Update: Looks like Nick Gillespie, aka The Jacket of Reason, get it but he does not get to expand on how he came to his correct conclusion. Redeye from 5 APR 2012.

Fiction: The Fuel of Regulation

How Wired Magazine sees Love Canal

From Karl Marx to Upton Sinclair to Michael Brown, the tradition continues; If you want the government to run things, make up a scary story.

Who remembers the Love Canal story?  If you don't, the script went something like this: Evilcorp (Hooker chemical) dumped dangerous chemicals into a canal, covered it with dirt, built houses on it and sold it to poor people for corporate profit.

That is not a strawman, that is what you will hear from most Americans if you mention Love Canal.  Just look at the way Wired told the story in 2008. Thanks to the major media narrative, a work of fiction by Michael Brown (Laying Waste: The Poisoning of America by Toxic Chemicals), and the endless assaults on commerce by fellow travelers trying to spread the 'truth' of Marx, this is the story we are left with.  The tell us at every turn that the only reason anybody gets hurt is because someone did not care, or worse, some corporation did it to make a buck.

As usual, the truth is the opposite of what your caring, loving, Democrat party member neighbor/professor/news writer told you.  At Love Canal, the government injured and killed people despite ample warnings by Hooker Chemical.

In a nine page 1981 Reason magazine article by Eric Zuesse (The Truth Seeps Out), and other sources we learn that:
- The US Army and the City of Niagara Falls dumped waste into the canal, including Manhattan Project waste, before Hooker became sole owner of the site.

- Hooker Chemical (Electrochemical) was the first entity to seal the bottom of the canal with clay and treat it as a proper long-term hazardous waste disposal site.

- The City of Niagara Falls created all breeches in the canal, after they owned the property.

- The property was sold to the government, after threats of condemnation and seizure under eminent domain, for $1, with ample information and warning of what was buried there and the accompanying hazards. From the deed:

Prior to the delivery of this instrument of conveyance, the grantee herein has been advised by the grantor that the premises above described have been filled, in whole or in part, to the present grade level thereof with waste products resulting from the manufacturing of chemicals by the grantor at its plant in the City of Niagara Falls, New York, and the grantee assumes all risk and liability incident to the use thereof. It is therefore understood and agreed that, as a part of the consideration for this conveyance and as a condition thereof, no claim, suit, action or demand of any nature whatsoever shall ever be made by the grantee, its successors or assigns, against the grantor, its successors or assigns, for injury to a person or persons, including death resulting therefrom, or loss of or damage to property caused by, in connection with or by reason of the presence of said industrial wastes. It is further agreed as a condition hereof that each subsequent conveyance of the aforesaid lands shall be made subject to the foregoing provisions and conditions.

So, the real story is: The government, from local to federal, was using a canal dug in 1890 as a waste pit. A chemical company came along in the 1950s and improved the area to a standard that exceeded government standards well into the 1980s.  The storage area that Hooker used remained intact until municipal government began digging willy-nilly through the hazardous waste repository after they owned it.

After the city discovered that Hooker Chemical's warnings were true, they sold the land at auction to the only sucker who would bid on it, and then proceeded to prevent him from improving the property at all through a flurry of regulations and permit requirements, none of which had anything to do with the hazardous waste in and around the site.

Eventually the property was sold a few more times and Niagara Falls, eager for tax revenue, approved a subdivision be built on the hazardous waste swamp created by that same local government.

If we had truly responsible government in the USA, every government official associated with Love Canal would be in jail and their property sold for restitution.  Even a casual examination of this case shows that Hooker Chemical was one of the only honest players in the disaster.  Of course, government made them the biggest victim.

As I indicated in the subtitle, this is not new.  Upton Sinclair wrote fiction, now quoted as canon whenever people talk about industrial regulation.  In The Jungle, Sinclair spun the yarn of a man ground to death in a packing plant, becoming part of the sausage produced there.  It made no difference that the event never happened, it was not even an exaggeration of a finger or leg amputation adapted to fiction, it was just fiction.

Worse than that, it was fiction designed to shove Americans toward Socialism that fell short of Sinclair's goal of a government owned and operated meat processing industry of the type he was fond of in Europe.  To Sinclair's disappointment, what the Progressive Teddy Roosevelt did was initiate the haphazard bombardment of the food industry with "inspectors" and regulations that, to this day, never solved a problem that never existed to begin with.

Newt Gingrich: The Liberal Fascist H.G. Wells Was Waiting For

The original Progressive laughing.

Reason had a good article the other day tracing Newt Gingrich's ideas on how to manipulate the US court system to those of the Progressives of the past.  It is worth the read.

A Liberal Fascist laughing.

An even better read is from a little earlier than that at National Review.  Mark Steyn spends four wonderful pages recalling Gingrich's comments about himself and plots involving massive government expense.  High speed maglev rail is kid stuff compared to what this National Socialist superman has in mind for the federal treasury ant your hip pocket.  This in particular Romney quote about Gingrich caught my eye (emphasis mine):

Vote for Newt and work with me in the mines.

With his numbers sinking, Mitt was driven to go negative. Asked where his policies differed from Gingrich’s, Romney cut to the chase: “We could start with his idea to have a lunar colony that would mine minerals from the moon.” You can’t tell the players without a scorecard, folks. Both leading conservative candidates have supported government mandates on health care. Both leading conservative candidates have supported massive expansion of entitlements. But they differ on the critical issue of whether we should use large numbers of welfare claimants to mine unpasteurized green cheese from the dark side of the moon. To be fair to Gingrich, he’s generally sounder on economic issues than Romney: Mitt’s reforms would leave us with a corporate-tax rate twice as high as Newt’s, and, in contrast to the Gingrich abolition of taxes on capital gains, Romney is proposing to end them only for those making under $200,000 because it would be wrong to “spend our precious tax dollars for a tax cut.” When “conservatives” think tax cuts are government “spending,” who needs Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank?

If you think Steyn and Romney are puffing a bit, let's cut to the video of Newt defending his moon mining idea, straight from a Jules Verne novel:

Of course, now it is "for the children".  Children who saw the original Star Trek, or the reruns, and thought that the government could send rescue workers through a transporter to the Louisiana Superdome in the aftermath of hurricane Kartrina can dream of working beside sexy moon maidens, or for them.

Mining the moon with the technology we have today carries with it an incredibly negative return on expenditure, especially as a public works project.  If government would just get out of the way (including their habit of picking favorites with tax dollars), then the free market will find a way to visit heavenly bodies and extract marketable material for use wherever people want to use it, when it is practical to do so..

In the 1930s, H. G. Wells coined the term Liberal Fascism:

H.G. Wells's ‘Liberal Fascism’

Philip Coupland

Abstract

During the 1930s H.G. Wells's theory of revolutionary praxis centred around a concept of ‘liberal fascism’ whereby the Wellsian ‘liberal’ utopia would be achieved by an authoritarian élite. Taking inspiration from the militarized political movements of the 1930s, this marked a development in the Wellsian theory of revolution from the ‘open conspiracy’ of the 1920s. Although both communist and fascist movements evinced some of the desired qualities of a Wellsian vanguard, it was fascism rather than communism which came closest to Wells's ideal. However, in practice, despite the failure of approaches to parties of the left and centre as possible agents of revolution, Wells rejected the British Union of Fascists. The disparity between Wells's theory and his actions when faced by the reality of fascism echoes the unresolved tension between ends and means at the heart of the concept of ‘liberal fascism’.

Jonah Goldberg of National Review rediscovered the phrase and used it to title a book about the liberal roots of both fascism (National Socialism) and Progressiveism.  I now own the domain Liberal-Fascism.Com.

The more Newt Gingrich talks, the more he fits the mold of the Wellsian Liberal Fascist Superman to swoop down and save us all with technology, backed by massive monuments to government.

Interestingly enough, Newt Gingrich is quoted as commenting on Goldberg's book here:

Of the book former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says: 'Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism will enrage many people on the left, but his dire thesis deserves serious attention.... Goldberg will lead you to new understanding and force you to think deeply.' Following Goldberg's remarks, a panel of experts will present their commentary on the book.

Maybe if he actually read the book he might have used different words.

See the video of Jonah Goldberg on  Fora.tv:

Reason Pimps The Wrong China, Again

Bradley Gardner: Reason's Thomas Friedman

Reason's very own version of Tom Friedman, Bradley Gardner, has a new post about Wenzhou, China.  A choice quote, slipped in at the end:

The government is strong enough to keep the mob from monopolizing finance and kleptocratic enough to keep entrepreneurs from dominating the industry; but beyond that the police are hands off.

Thomas Friedman, the NYT Bradley Gardner

In his previous article, Gardner painted a rosy picture of the PRC leaving everybody alone, a veritable libertopia of commerce that Liberation Daily touted Wenzhou as the model for the rest of China as far back as 1985, but claims that the recent alarm from the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times(!) are nothing to worry about.  Apparently Gardner counts everybody with a hammer as a "factory owner" (his count of "factory owners" in the province of 3 Million is 400,000) so ninety of them fleeing after a government crackdown is nothing to worry about.  If every "factory" really had only 7.5 workers, this might be nothing.  Other opinions differ.

Has history been erased so well that even a former Libertarian standard bearer like reason has forgotten scenes like this?

Tank Man, 5 June 1989

Demolition of a Church in China

Note that Gardner is a reporter in Beijing, presumably with permission from the PRC.  Perhaps the Shanghai Commies at Liberation Daily (Jiefang Daily?) were flying under the radar of the home office in Beijing in 1985?  Reason being, well, reason, does not mention the state of religious freedom in Wenzhou.  However, to be fair, reason has never been big on that aspect of freedom, so one will not find the answer there.  However, in 2000 the Baltimore Sun knew what was still happening in China with basic religious freedom:

The recent demolition campaign focused on several areas in Zhejiang Province, particularly Wenzhou, a city of more than 6 million people known for its energetic merchant class and deep religious roots. Protestant and Catholic missionaries began converting people in Wenzhou beginning in the latter part of the 19th century when the city became a treaty port. With more than 700,000 Protestants and several hundred thousand Catholics, it has a higher percentage of Christians than any other municipality in China.

China's state-run media rarely - if ever - publicize demolition campaigns because it only invites international condemnation. This time, though, the government gave some media a green light to report on the demolitions.

Late last month, the Wenzhou Daily reported that thousands of government employees and Communist Party cadres in Zhejiang's Ruian City demolished 28 unapproved "religious sites" and 356 small temples, occasionally using dynamite when needed. - The Baltimore Sun, Places of worship razed in Chinese crackdown, 15 December 2000, by By Frank Langfitt

Chinese factory workerss

Make no mistake, nothing has improved on that front.  Note also that Christian missionaries to China from the United States still must take extensive precautions to avoid arrest.  Mainland Chinese citizens who attend Churches in America frequently do so under assumed names and still live in fear of being found out by the PRC authorities.

Back to reason, by the time 1989 rolled around, the pulp version of reason was printing this about China:

The emergence of the American world nation also has profound ideological implications. The American message– stressing individual rights and private initiative–is gradually becoming universal and less linked to "white" ideology. Nowhere is this clearer than in China, where American cultural and political influence has a powerful appeal, particularly among the young. When 50,000 Chinese students demonstrated in Shanghai’s People’s Square in December 1986, they waved banners depicting the Statue of Liberty and a dragon bound in chains. Emblazoned on the banners were calls for such American-style values as democracy, human rights, and freedom. - Reason, America's Rising Sun, January 1989, by Joel Kotkin

So, how did reason cover the Tienanmen Square protests five months later?  With silence.  No, really.  They finally mentioned Tienanmen Square in a 1995 book review on non-violent protest.  Apparently, as far as reason is concerned, the demonstrations ignored by the PRC are the ones that count and the ones the tanks show up for are the ones that they do not bother mentioning, until 2009, twenty years after the fact:

But the episode was not what it initially appeared to be: the end of China's evolution toward a more liberal system. It was only an interruption of that process. In the aftermath, the Chinese Communist Party grasped that it could hold onto power only by delivering a better life to its people, which it could achieve only by loosening its grip on their lives. 

The rose colored bong continues to bubble at 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest.  Like many who are blind to the wiley ways of Socialists, the reason staff and contributors seem to be under the false illusion that having the liberty to chose what color shoes to wear on the way to the factory is freedom enough.  As Jonah Goldberg has mentioned, the ROC murdered 67 million people before trying (crony) capitalism, and I will add that they have not even given a wink to the free market.  It is only a matter of time before the people of Wenzhou get the treat of seeing how well their privately built roads hold up under the load of PRC tanks.

PBS's FRONTLINE unarguably has a much better grasp on the situation in China than reason ever did, or will.

Almost two decades later, the educated elite who led the protests of 1989 have benefited handsomely from China's rapid economic growth, but many Chinese workers still face brutal working conditions and low wages. "A lot of factories do not even have one day off," says labor expert Dr. Anita Chan who has been researching working conditions inside China for 15 years. "That means seven days a week, 13 hours a day."

In fact, some experts see the emergence of two Chinas: one modern, wealthy and urban; the other rural, poor and disenfranchised. There is evidence that unrest among workers and peasants is growing; in 2005, there were more than 87,000 "civil disturbances" in the country.

A real success story, the Republic of China, aka, Taiwan began at the same time as the PRC with much better results.  Perhaps Gardner and Friedman could take a little field trip there and see what they can find?

The Decline of Reason: Riggs Is The New Weigel

Gun toting Socialist, David Weigel

As a frequent reader and infrequent commentator at reason magazine's blog for several years, I am somewhat shocked at the latest incarnation of David Weigel, who goes by the name Mike Riggs, gracing their blog.

Like Weigel, Riggs expresses not one hint of knowing that government police power is perfectly acceptable to protect private property:
New York Judge Upholds Eviction of Occupy Wall Street from Zuccotti Park by Mike Riggs

The new Dave Weigel Socialist at reason: Mike Riggs

Everything Bloomberg does to you is for your own good, even jail! was his tone when the city of New York finally got around to clearing out the #Occupy squatters defiling privately owned Zuccotti Park in Manhattan.  I defy you to distinguish the reason post from the worst one can find daily in the Nation or Slate for refusing to even acknowledge that private property owners have any rights whatsoever.

Bradley Gardner: Reason's Thomas Friedman

Reason no longer confines itself to being a champion of stripping real property owners of any control of their land, while bashing the police for actually doing something that they are supposed to do.  No, as if Leon Panetta, Joe Biden, Norman Fleishman, Tom Friedman (and the rest of the New York Times staff) were not falsely touting Communist China's crony capitalism (conveniently leaving out the word "crony") in the mainstream media, reason recently entertained us with this bit of Bradley Gardner pap:
New at Reason: Bradley Gardner on China’s Black Market City

Chen Mingyuan has lived here all his life, but he still gets lost every time he drives into Wenzhou. “All the roads in this town were built by businessmen, so none of them make any sense,” Chen says as we back out of what we just discovered is a one-way street. For the last 30 years, private citizens in this southeastern China metropolis have largely taken over one of the least questioned prerogatives of governments the world over: infrastructure. 

The article fawns over the people of Wenzhou for building the infrastructure that the government did not build, and the Communist Chinese government for "looking the other way" so that these brave entrepreneurs can engage in commerce.  Perhaps a video of what the Chinese government does build around Wenzhou should dampen any praise for Communist engineering, or any respect for private property to build disasters waiting to happen:

Not a matter of if, but when.

Oddly, the reason take on the situation is that if the Communist government took a peek and went away, then they will continue to do so.

The government’s indifference didn’t last forever. But when the authorities got around to paying attention, they decided not to mess with a good thing. In 1985 Liberation Daily, a paper sponsored by the Shanghai Communist Party, referred to Wenzhou as a “model” for other parts of China to study. In the next year 15,000 government officials visited the city to learn, not crack down. Although bureaucrats still occasionally try to impose state controls on the city, the futility of the effort quickly becomes apparent. By now the local Chamber of Commerce has taken to negotiating trade deals both domestically and internationally because, as in most other things, the private sector is more effective here.

There was no pondering of how long it would be before the autocrats in Beijing show up to claim the "people's property" without so much as a thankyouverymuch and seizing the privately built roads and utilities.  No, the article waxed on about how this is the way Chinese capitalism works.  Something else missing was any government enforcement of contracts, but there was a slight nod to the iron-fisted loan shark enforcement that may or may not exist.

Gray-market lenders are often established, though technically illegal, financial institutions that lend primarily working-capital loans at rates as high as 10 percent a month. Contacts often modify interest rates based on how well you know them. Forms of repayment enforcement differ. Weng points out that in a community so dependent on guanxi—relationships—defaulting on a contact’s loan could blackball you from future business opportunities. Weng doesn’t clarify how defaulters are treated by underground debt collectors, but he does say they “aren’t the type of people I’d want to get involved with.”

This is an incredibly naive view of how authoritarian governments operate.  Even here in the United States, where nobody could argue with a straight face is anything approaching the authoritarianism demonstrated in China, when people make property valuable the government swoops in to take it over or get their unconscionable cut.

Reason, it has been nice knowing you as a sometime voice of reason (drink!) in a world teaming with Socialists.  Now you have joined their ranks as a sideshow act, destined to be a punchline in the monologues of David Corn and Katrina Vanden Heuvel on cable news appearances.

Socialist Of The Week: Lawrence O'Donnell

Socialist of the Week Ending 10/29/2011: Lawrence O'Donnell

I planned to feature major feats of typical, transparent socialism on this blog from the beginning  Here is the first winner:  Lawrence O'Donnell

Host O'Donnell tees up a question for a #OccupyOakland protestor, who whiffs it.

She knows to exaggerate tear gas into "chemical weapons," but she did not have the presence to lie about the rock and bottle throwing.

A transcript from Glenn Beck:

“At that point we were in a position where we had to deploy gas in order to stop the crowd and people from pelting us with bottles and rocks,” the Oakland Interim Chief of Police told reporters following scrutiny of the police response to the protesters in Oakland.

“Did you see people throwing bottles and rocks at the police before they used those tactics?” O’Donnell asked a protester.

“Umm, yeah. People were doing that,” the protester told the MSNBC host.

The Cosmotarians at Reason magazine even said the police were the ones doing the rioting:

Members of the Oakland Police Department rioted last night, firing tear gas and chasing residents. (Bonus: Slate explains why tear gas isn't illegal.)

One can only guess that Reason's inclusion of the Slate information is the way they share an affinity with the 'oppressed' Viet Cong 'victims' of tear gas, but I digress.

Occupy Oakland

This tactic employed by O'Donnell, lying about who initiated violence, was perfected in the American media during the 1960s by Soviet backed International Socialists, like David Horowitz.  Horowitz has spoken often, and in detail, abut the tactics he and his friends used through the Cold War to help the Soviets on every front and try to take down the United States.

The same thing is happening now, with MSNBC taking up the torch of Socialism against anybody in striking distance.

#OccupyDC And Their Version Of Freedom

The default position of the Socialist is Authoritarian.  Stalin, Lenin and Mao adorn the t-shirts of the loyal Socialist for exactly this reason.

So this is what the "General Assembly" of #OccupyDC thinks of the "public space" that they occupy.  Once they squat, it is their private property and you better not watch what they do in public.

Reason magazine has more on the circus surrounding the act recorded in this ring.

The Cosmotarian Take on #OccupyWallStreet

Some interesting footage shot by a Reason magazine staffer during the #OccupyWallStreet demonstrations. Lotion Man, aka Information Man, aka Danny Cline makes an appearance and tells the camera how smart he is compared to the rest of the clowns. There is also an apparent Zeitgeist fan in the video demanding a "resource based economy."