That the Obama administration has engaged in one car crash after another in pursuit of fundamentally transforming America is beyond contest.
Perhaps this was a purposeful strategy, knowing that the American public would tire of looking at these spectacular debacles giving way for the Obama administration to piece together a new nation from the presumed “wreckage” of old.
Obamacare, the nation-breaking comprehensive immigration reform, gun-control legislation to disarm the American people, IRS intimidation of conservative organizations, the Fast and Furious gunrunning scandal and the obfuscation of facts in the Benghazi situation all represent policy car crashes that continue to unfold before our eyes.
It’s overwhelmingly to try and keep the chaos this administration has its hands in fomenting.
But quietly, with all the policy changes, lies, half-truths and attempts to “elect a new people” through immigration reform (amnesty), one story has slipped through the cracks, spelling the end of freedom of association in America.
Have you familiarized yourself with the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH),” initiative?
Well, if you are familiar with Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron” story, you know exactly what this initiative is designed to promote – equality.
This is how the U.S. News and World Report described the HUD program:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has proposed a new plan to change U.S. neighborhoods it says are racially imbalanced or are too tilted toward rich or poor, arguing the country’s housing policies have not been effective at creating the kind of integrated communities the agency had hoped for.
The proposed federal rule, called “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” is currently under a 60-day public comment period. Though details of how the policy would specifically work are unclear, the rule says HUD would provide states, local governments and others who receive agency money with data and a geospatial tool to look at “patterns of integration and segregation; racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty; access to education, employment, low-poverty, transportation, and environmental health.”
States would then assess the best way to integrate communities deemed by HUD’s data to not be integrated enough. A HUD official, who did not want to speak on record because of the public comment period, said the rule hopes to better match up HUD-assisted housing with the communities that have good hospitals, schools and other assets.
So would the city of Detroit, which recently declared the largest municipal bankruptcy in American history, qualify as a needed recipient of “reverse AFFH” initiative? The racial imbalance of the Motor City is a little off in 2013, considering 80 percent or more of the city’s population is black.
I’m joking, of course. But you can bet, according to the Obama administration, that a city with a population of 80 percent or more of white citizens is in need of a strong dose of the AFFH initiative.
When you look on the website of the Federal Register (the daily journal of the United States government – bet you didn’t know the government kept one, did you?) and read about the AFFH, one line jumps right at you:
The definition of “affirmatively furthering fair housing” clarifies that AFFH, while including antidiscrimination measures, requires proactive steps to foster more inclusive communities and access to community assets for all those protected by the Fair Housing Act.
Any time you see the word “antidiscrimination” used by the government, understand that it literally means “government-mandated discrimination against the hard-working taxpayer.” Somehow in our society the definition of discrimination has often come to mean “those who have not succeeded within the confines of society due to some racial injustice.” It rarely takes into account that a lack of traditional success is directly attributable to the lack of adherence to the basic formula of success. I personally know affluent blacks and each and every one of them followed the basic rules one must follow in order to succeed, and guess what. In America, they succeeded!
Anytime you see words like “proactive,” “inclusive,” “access” and, worst of all, “fair,” understand you’re wading knee deep in the waters of Karl Marx.
When such words are used in the same sentence, you are generally drowning in waters of Marx.
Again, trying to pay attention to all of the news out of Washington, D.C., and the changes in laws that will impact your life and the lives of your children and grandchildren is quite difficult.
But the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” plan being floated by HUD goes far beyond any attempt at social engineering our enlightened federal government has ever attempted.
It’s a thinly veiled attempt to impose handicaps on communities that, for lack of a better term, thrive.
It’s a culmination of the satirical world envisioned by Vonnegut in his dystopian “Harrison Bergeron” short-story, with HUD serving as the stand-in for the “handicapper general.”
If you aren’t familiar with Vonnegut’s story, here’s a quick synopsis:
It’s the year 2081. Because of Amendments to the Constitution, every American is fully equal, meaning that no one is smarter, better-looking, stronger, or faster than anyone else. To ensure equality, a Handicapper General and a team of agents ensure that the laws of equality are enforced. The government mandates citizens wear “handicaps” (a mask if they are too handsome or beautiful, earphones with deafening radio signals to make intelligent people unable to concentrate and form thoughts, and heavy weights to slow down those who are too strong or fast).
If such a dynamic existed on the PGA Tour, I’d be a helluva golfer. One can only idiotically hope, however. Maybe I could have won the PGA Championship last weekend.
The “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” plan is nothing more than handicapping productive communities (and damaging the property value of homeowners in these communities, where most of your average American’s wealth is directly tied to) in the name of “equality” and “fairness.”
Vonnegut’s short story was a satirical warning of what a future where the concept of “equality” was the only value pursued, taking this pursuit to its logical conclusion.
“Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” is a plan that would effectively handicap current homeowners and communities, all in the name of “equality.”
If you aren’t mad now at the attempts by the Obama administration to engineer a new American dream, nothing will compel you from apathy.