The Robin Hood tax = just more robbing hoods

Look what the digital cat just dragged in from cyberspace:

"Robin Hood Tax" Global Day of Action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxssOLzZe0c&feature=player_embedded

"Looks good," you say, "But smells funny"? Exactly. All those healthy-looking young folk with their creative showmanship, it has to be something good and truly populist, right?

Not exactly. The headline in the email

Over 1,000 economists ask the G20 for the application of a tax on international financial transactions

.......sounded pretty heady. So, it's a tax on the big banks where it's needed most, huh?

Wrong again. The rest of the blurb shows it's simply more zombie leftist brainwashing of humanity, young and otherwise:

Over 1,000 economists from many of the world's leading universities ask in a letter addressed to the ministers of finances of the G20, gathering in Washington on April 14 and 15, the definitive implementation of a tax on International Financial Transactions.
This proposal, defended by the UBUNTU Forum and a number of civil society organizations for a long time, would raise thousands of millions of Euros to reduce inequalities, fight poverty and the climate change, among other priorities.
The technical feasibility of the tax (of about 0'05%) has already been proved, thus political will is the only missing element for the application of the proposal, which responds to a fair and imperative need.

Wikipedia unwittingly cuts through the puffery like a buzz saw:

The Robin Hood tax has been supported by some 350 economists in a letter written to the G20 , including Joseph Stiglitz and Jeffery Sachs.^[13] Politicians supporting the tax include Angela Merkel , Nicolas Sarkozy and Katsuya Okada, Japan's foreign minister.^{[14] [15]} From the financial sector, support has been forthcoming by prominent figures including George Soros, Warren Buffett and Lord Turner , chairman of the UK’s Financial Services Authority.^[15]

How 'bout those prettily named "civil society organizations"? Wikipedia's got them covered. The phrase's hyperlink in the above article opens to

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

........which however bears the heading "Non-governmental organization". Gee, did you know all those leftist pressure groups were pushing for a "civil society"? You know, Planned Parenthood, Anti-Defamation League, ACLU, maybe the flat-earth society. Perhaps the real news here is the birth of a shiny, alluring new buzzphrase: CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATION. A drum roll, please, and some violins, maybe some violin violence in celebration of where liberal "civility" leads.

No doubt this term has the same horoscope as "community organizer". Hey, anything with the word "civil" or "society" or "community" in it has to be beatific, no? Anybody out there want to start a Sustainable Society for Civil Communities?

But my real point wanted to be how great libbers are at organizing, theater, effect, affect (n.), symbols etc. even as they're publicizing something absolutely awful and poisonous. We conservatives need to start imitating the former because that's how you reach more of the people more of the time.

.............You probably heard about another perfect case (compare to other recent jottings here, not so much to the above) of libbers doing a shockingly right thing for the wrong reason:

College Bans National Anthem — ‘Too Violent’
http://patriotupdate.com/11434/college-bans-national-anthem-too-violent

It's "Shockingly right" because -- in my opinion -- the Star-Spangled Banner is one of the worst possible representations of what America should be about. AH -- hear me out please. I love the tune and words as much as anybody else at a purely sentimental/sedimental level. When I was in "middle" school I was called upon to play it before every assembly. I love the memory of what all that once meant to me, even as a clueless young conservative at that time, groping in the socio-political darkness of Zoo Zersey.

But the real world has turned out to be the exact opposite of that. The "American" flag has come to signify the violent and bestial new world order, and the national anthem is grotesquely fitting: face it, it IS about war, even if only the rare sane case of 1812.

Please note that the only verse ever sung (e.g. crooned, belted, styled and murdered at ballgames) is a question, not a statement of American ideals. The other verses were fine fine fine for the early 19th century, but poorly suited, I think, for their purpose if permanently carved in stone.

I want a peaceable America. Peace is patriotic. Yes, we must be willing to lay our lives on the line if our country is attacked, but the actual military history of ameriKa is mostly not much to be proud of by pure Constitutional and Biblical standards. So what song would I prefer?

How about Dixie? Seriously.

.............This just in -- the antidote to the lies, the condemnation of ameriKa's present roster of geopolitical rape-murders! You know, the ones people celebrate with "power of pride" bumper stickers showing the yankee barber-pole banner?

General of all American Intelligence: 911 was a fraud!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E

/\/.\/\/.