Help us fight the
ObamaMedia

click title for home page
  
Be a subscribing
member

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
The stuff you won't see in the liberal media
Register Calendar Chat
 
 
 


Note: This topic is locked. No new replies will be accepted.


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 3      1   2   3   Next
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #1 

Paul Roderick Gregory says the Pew Research finds that sixty percent of Americans respond negatively to "socialism." It is clear why Barack Obama must avoid that label. Words are important. Political candidates who control the language of political discourse win elections.

Most of our elites would certainly not entertain the question: "Is Obama a Socialist?" Only irresponsible fanatics carelessly throw around such epithets, they say. Polite circles ignore such goofiness.

As someone who has professionally studied and written about comparative economics, capitalism, and socialism for almost fifty years, the reticence to probe the core beliefs of a political leader seems odd. The question is perfectly legitimate in both an academic and political context as long as we define terms and place the discussion in proper context.

By "socialist," I do not mean a Lenin, Castro, or Mao, but whether Obama falls within the mainstream of contemporary socialism as represented, for example, by Germany’s Social Democrats, French Socialists, or Spain’s socialist-workers party?

By this criterion, yes, Obama is a socialist.

The socialist parties of Europe trace their origins to reform Marxism. After Marx’s death in 1883, Europe’s Marxists rejected the Bolsheviks’ call for socialist revolution and worked within the political system for Marxist goals. Marxists, such as Karl Leibknecht, August Bebel, Paul Lafargue, Leon Blum, and others, formed the socialist parties that we know today. Most emerged from the trade-union movement, and they retain close ties with organized labor today, as does Obama’s Democrat Party.

Whereas, the eighteenth century liberalism of John Locke and Adam Smith gave us our constitution and limited government, Marxism provided the intellectual foundations of the European welfare state.

The European socialists have their welfare state. Even their conservative opponents no longer question the "social state," despite rising concern about its affordability. In the United States, we are fighting the battle of the welfare state, and we do not know what the outcome will be.

The European welfare state takes one half of national output to provide state health care, pensions, extended unemployment benefits, income grants, and free higher education. Failed nationalizations taught European socialists to leave enterprise in private hands and coerce it through taxation and regulation to contribute to what the state deems the "social welfare."

The November 2011 Declaration of Principles of the Party of European Socialists (PES) summarizes the European socialist agenda. I condense its main points and compare them with Obama’s statements and legislative initiatives:

PES: The welfare state and state-provided universal access to education and health care are society’s great achievements.

Obama: Favors universal access to health care and associated benefits as a critical expansion of the welfare state.

PES: A strong and just society must ensure that the wealth generated by all is shared fairly as determined by the state.

Obama: Favors progressive taxes on the rich to redistribute income and wealth from winners to losers and to ensure that all pay their fair share. (As he has said: "When you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.")

PES: Collective responsibility makes society stronger when people work together, and all people are enabled to live a dignified life, free of poverty and protected from social risks in life.

Obama: Favors collective responsibility (as defined by the federal government) to protect all from social risks through food stamps, welfare programs, extended unemployment benefits, guaranteed health care, the bailing out of big companies, forcing renegotiation of mortgages, class action law suits, and other measures. (Instead of opportunity and incentive to succeed, no one is allowed to fail).

PES: The state must insure that economic growth is environmentally "sustainable."

Obama: Favors carbon taxes, higher energy prices, restricted drilling and refining, and subsidies of green technology for the "common good," even at the expenses of higher conventional growth and jobs.

PES: If unfettered by state control, market forces, driven by and greed and shift power to the privileged few, deepen economic, geographic and social inequalities, and create economic crises.

Obama: Shows a distrust of market forces and advocates selective regulation, subsidies, and taxation to persuade or coerce business to promote the general welfare as he defines it. Industries not part of his collective endeavor (oil and gas and coal) are penalized. Industries that serve his conception of "general welfare" (green technology) are to be promoted even if the market rejects them.

PES: Ensuring long lasting prosperity, stability and above all, peace requires effective coordination in the international realm based on democracy, mutual respect, and human rights.

Obama: Places reliance on international institutions, international consensus, and mutual respect in the conduct of foreign policy. (The United States must coordinate its foreign policy with international organizations and treat even rogue nations with respect in the hope that they will voluntarily improve their behavior).

PES: A strong state must preserve the public good, guarantee the common interest, promote justice and solidarity and allow people to lead lives rich beyond material wealth, so that each individual’s fulfillment is also part of a collective endeavor.

Obama: Advocates a strong state that offers the "positive right" of political and economic justice to its citizens. He complains that the U.S. Constitution is a "charter of negative liberties," that dictates what government "can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."

If the Party of European Socialists were to rate Obama, he would get a near perfect score. The political views and programs that Obama is prepared to reveal to the public are consistent with those of European socialists. He is clearly a socialist in the European sense of the term.

If the "socialist label" sticks, Obama faces an even more uphill 2012 campaign. In scripted moments – like Tuesday’s State of the Union Address — he must present his socialist campaign themes while avoiding the appearance of being a socialist.

Obama must worry most about those slips in unscripted moments that, I believe, reveal a deep animosity towards private enterprise. He has given us a few fleeting glimpses, such as his complaint about the Constitution’s "negative rights and his off-the-cuff "spread the wealth around" remark. His most recent and significant slip was to tell Occupy Wall Street protesters: "You are the reason I ran for office."

Obama’s defenders will counter that Republicans also accept Social Security and a progressive income tax and that his slips are taken out of context. But these criticisms fail to address the remarkable coincidence of Obama’s views with those of European socialists. By comparing Obama not to Lenin or Mao but to European socialism, we have placed the question "Is Obama a socialist?" in a fair and appropriate context.

Our political discourse is conducted largely in the language of the left, to the disadvantage of conservatives. After all, who can oppose "fairness, justice, dignified life, or sustainable growth?" Only sophisticated observers understand that these are code words for something else. They are all excuses for the state to take from one group to give to another or to coerce people or businesses to do something they do not want to do otherwise. The more powerful the state, the greater the risk of state coercion under the guise of noble aims. Enhancing the size, scope, and power of the state vis-à-vis the private sector may be Obama’s ultimate objective.

This country was founded on the principle that individuals should not be subject to the control of a powerful state. That founding idea has never before been in greater peril.

Please post additional items to Barack Obama -- Marxist thread.

This duplicate thread is closed but contains useful information . . .


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Lou E Brown

Registered:
Posts: 518
Reply with quote  #2 

I don't like the Halfrican, and it is not his race or color that I don't like. It is his attitude toward American values. If he would just go somewhere he likes the people and their values, he could be happy and so could we. However, hell is a last resort, so to speak.

Yephora

Registered:
Posts: 190
Reply with quote  #3 
How about Communist.
  
Yes, there's a Communist living in the White House.
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #4 

In his own words -- Barack Obama is a Socialist

 

 

Obama a socialist?

 

Yes.  It is true!  Barack Obama, his close friend Al Sharpton, Ronald Reagan, and the founding fathers all agree that Obama is a socialist! a socialist utopia was the dream of Barack Obamas father, and though he could not realize this dream himself, he is subverting congress and destroying the balance of power that our Constitution has so beautifully created, and enforcing socialism on the United States of America.

From the numerous unelected czars, to the many executive orders that he has passed, Obama is doing all that he can to push his socialist takeover and destroy our very own Constitution right before our eyes. Yes, Obama's socialism is destroying our free markets as he picks winners and losers, launders money to his ardent supporters through trillion dollar stimulus packages. He has taken over much of the private sector with his socialist health care takeover know affectionately as "ObamaCare" and he is stifling growth and jobs as he joined hands with the Communist Green Movement (avowed communist Van Jones worked in the Obama White House).

True to his roots, Obama has surrounded himself with radical Marxist individuals who think that the Constitution is an outdated document, and that Karl Marx was right and wealth redistribution works. As we have seen from history, socialist and communist regimes have brought death and destruction to their own people numbering in the hundreds of millions!

As Karl Marx himself said, "Democracy is the road to socialism" and as we have seen socialism and communism are extremely similar and have the same father- Karl Marx. We will let him tell you in his own words how Obama is a Socialist!
  
Permalink . . .

 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #5 

Obama the Socialist

Warren Beatty (not the liberal actor) says if there was ever any doubt that Barack Hussein Obama is a socialist, this should remove any doubt. In 2008, Obama was endorsed by, and was a member of, the far-left New Party. The New Party could best be described as social democratic in orientation. It is committed to socialism based on principles of social justice, community, responsibility, and democracy.

Two questions arise: (1) Who gets to define social justice, community, responsibility, and democracy? and (2) What is allowed if we do not agree with the definitions?

 

Anyway, back to Obama. Did you know that there were extremely close ties between Obama, the New Party in Chicago, and ACORN? And Obama has ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, which is associated with Socialist International. And did you know that Obama's father wrote a paper called "Problems Facing Our Socialism" that advocates 100% taxation of the rich, communal ownership of land and the forced confiscation of privately controlled land.

I guess 2008 was a very busy news year, so the MSM totally missed Obama's ties with socialism.

Further, while speaking at the University of Michigan in 2010, Obama said: Don't call our socialism "socialism!" He continued: We must doctor our language as well.

Unionized public-sector employment is the essence of the left's moral ideal. No one has to worry about making a profit. Generous health-care and retirement benefits are provided to everyone by the government. Comfortable pay is mandated by legislative fiat. The work rules are militantly egalitarian: pay, promotion, and job security are almost totally independent of actual job performance. And because everyone works for the government, they never have to worry that their employer will go out of business. In short, public employment is an idealized socialist economy. Put it all together, and you have the Democrats' version of utopia.

 

But... unionized public-sector employment promises the full socialist ideal to a small minority-paid for with tax money taken from a larger, productive private economy. But the socialist utopia of public employment has crossed the Thatcher Line: the point at which you run out of other people's money.

On the national front, Obama and the liberals/progressives/Democrats are panicking as their experiment with American socialism implodes. It has become quite clear that the old-age welfare state of Social Security and Medicare is driving the federal government into permanent trillion-dollar deficits and a ruinous debt load. Even Obama acknowledged that these programs are the real drivers of runaway debt.

Just so you know, Socialism, defined as a centrally planned economy in which the government controls all means of production, was the tragic failure of the twentieth century. Born of a commitment to remedy the economic and moral defects of capitalism, it has far surpassed capitalism in both economic malfunction and moral cruelty.

Perhaps Obama has, since 2008, changed his politics? Let's see. On January 22, 2012, Paul Roderick Gregory, at forbes.com, wrote: "By 'socialist' I do not mean a Lenin, Castro, or Mao, but whether Obama falls within the mainstream of contemporary socialism as represented, for example, by Germany's Social Democrats, French Socialists, or Spain's socialist-workers party. By this criterion, yes, Obama is a socialist."

But that's just my opinion.

 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Longknife 21

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #6 

Obama is using Socialism as a step-stool to power. He is not a "good" socialist, even by socialist standards, but an Elitist Wannabe. Look at his life style. No real socialist would be that wasteful, or condone and even encourage wastefulness in his underlings.

 

He is a Totalitarian. He is only promising the "Socialist Utopia" to buy votes from the ignorant, greedy, and lazy, that is his political base.
When and if he obtains his goal of 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' we will see his true face. It will be total govt control. Everyone will work at an assigned job. Any advancement will be based on 'loyalty to the Party'. Anyone whose loyalty is suspect will be 're-educated'. Any political resistance, or even questions, will be severely punished.

 

His goal is to punish America. His 'Socialism' is just bait for the trap. Nothing he says is really true, he lies to his socialist friends as quickly as he lies to the American voters.

Claudia

Registered:
Posts: 1,222
Reply with quote  #7 
hey Longknife,
Where ya been???  I have been missing your posts.
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #8 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #9 

Angela Davis says he's a "black radical"

   

Bob Unruh says longtime Communist Party USA member Angela Davis, the 1960s radical who twice was the party’s nominee for vice president, called Barack Obama a black radical, raising objections from her fellow travelers.

Davis, who also was associated with the Black Panther Party and was acquitted of murder charges in 1970, said the Obama election was a “victory, not of an individual, but of … people who refused to believe that it was impossible to elect a person, a black person, who identified with the black radical tradition.”

She said it was good to see people “dancing in the streets” over Obama.

The comments were reported by Glen Ford of the Black Agenda Report, who declared: “Angela Davis Has Lost Her Mind Over Obama.”

“The ‘delusional effect’ that swept black America with the advent of the first black president has warped and weakened the mental powers of some of our most revered icons – and it has been painful to behold,” he wrote. “Earlier this month, Angela Davis diminished herself as a scholar and thinker in a gush of nonsense about the corporate executive in the White House.”

He explained Davis’ comments came at a conference on Empowering Women of Color at Berkeley, held in March.

“Angela Davis was saying that Barack Obama is a man who identifies with the black radical tradition. She said it casually, as if black radicalism and Obama were not antithetical terms; as if everything he has written, said and done in national politics has not been a repudiation of the black radical traditions; as if his rejection of his former minister, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was not a thorough disavowal of the black radical tradition.”

Wright, the Chicago pastor under whom Obama was taught for 20 years, famously shouted, “God d— America!” to his congregation.

At All Voices, a commentary said Davis’ statements were “met with shock.”

“Angela Davis is an elder icon among many black radicals,” the commentary said. “She was for a long time a member of the Communist Party and was also in the Black Panthers. She was even once charged with murder though her only connection to the killing was the purchase of some guns involved. … However now it seems she is a well-behaved Obama supporter!

“As Ford points out Obama has not the slightest desire to belong to the black radical tradition. In fact, Obama in a national broadcast said ‘there is no black America … only the United States of America,” All Voices said.

“Rush Limbaugh and other right wing talk show hosts should be able to have fun and get some mileage from Davis’s comments – Imagine even a former Black Panther and long time Communist says that Obama is a black radical.”

Ford said, “Angela Davis, who retired as a professor of the history of human consciousness, in 2008, seems not to be conscious of the fact that she is repudiating herself, her history, her comrades – all in a foolish attempt to artificially graft a totally unworthy Barack Obama onto the black radical tradition – a place he not only does not belong, but most profoundly does not want to be.”

Davis became part of the establishment in California by taking a job as acting assistant professor at UCLA in the 1960s. The regents tried to fire her for her participation in the Communist Party but were stopped by a lawsuit. Later they succeeded in removing her from the post because of statement such as that the regents “killed, brutalized (and) murdered” demonstrators.

She was tried because she bought some of the guns used when Jonathan Jackson, on Aug. 7, 1970, took control of a California courtroom. The judge, one of the jurors, the prosecutor and three black men were killed in the resulting gunfight.

Ultimately, she was acquitted of charges.

About the time the Soviet Union collapsed, Davis became a member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a reformist wing of the Communist Party USA. She recently has been speaking at Occupy Wall Street protests in Philadelphia and Washington Square in New York City.

 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Claudia

Registered:
Posts: 1,222
Reply with quote  #10 
you know, when she and Ayers, Dorhn and all the rest of those "radicals" were made part of the main stream and got jobs teaching the young back in the early 70's, every one of the "regular" people of the Country hould have stood up and demanded that all of them be fired from their supposed positions because of the their political stands being foreign to what America stood for....

That was when the biggest degradation of our teaching profession started happening and the children were started to believing in propaganda instead of free thought.  They started learning the Pavlovian way......   and that was the start of the death knell for America...
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #11 

Robin Leach: Obama a socialist 'whipping up' racial war and economic divide
 
Joe Newby is reporting that Robin Leach -- the former host of Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous -- said Barack Obama is a socialist who is "whipping up this racial war and this economic divide,"

Newsbusters' Noel Sheppard reported Wednesday.

Leach made his comments while appearing as a guest on Neil Cavuto's Fox News program.

"You are not a fan of what is going on here," Cavuto said.

"No, I think it is deadly dangerous and I don't use those two words lightly," Leach responded.

"Look, what Obama is proposing you've got to cut right down to it, it is socialism. It is so ugly and evil. It doesn't work - it's never worked. And we went through this in Britain until Maggy Thatcher rescued us from a fate worse than what's going to happen here," he added.

Leach went on to say that Obama "takes umbrage" to that description "because it is the truth."

He also called Obama's call to "level the playing field" a "colloquial, warm, fuzzy expression" that means he's a socialist.

Leach also described Obama's desire to tax the rich more a desire to "punish the rich."

"Whip the rich. Make them as middle income and as poor as the people who aren't rich," he said.

Cavuto reminded Leach that at one time, the top rate was 90 percent. Leach responded by reminding Cavuto that the rate was once 99 percent in Great Britain.

"Surely no one paid that," Cavuto responded.

"There were more people who paid it than didn't pay it, and it looked like the end of the world. Because what happens is if you remove the monetary supply from the economy and turn it over to politicians and the government to administer, you know that everywhere you turn be it a bush that costs $300,000 to plant in a road or a GSA conference in Las Vegas, government wastes money," Leach said.

He continued:

Government cannot run anything efficiently. Government breeds corruption and laziness because it is a we do not care philosophy. It is rich people and it is private enterprise and it's small business owners who go out there and bust their humps to make progress in whatever line of work they are doing. It is in our human nature.

But then there is this other group of people who think that the money should be taken away from the go-getters and do-gooders because they are not going to do it and they can't do it and they won't do it. And for as long as you have a president who is whipping up this racial war and this economic divide, which he is doing quietly, but some of us see through it, you begin to realize that level the playing field is truly socialism.

"Yet folks in our media are 100 percent behind this president never questioning his motives or his policies," Sheppard noted.

He concluded by asking: "Makes you want to cry, doesn't it?"
 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Longknife 21

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #12 
Socialist or Communist?
 
The difference is: When Socialists get control of the 'Coercive Force', Police, Courts, and the Military, they can become Totalitarian Communists. Marx insisted that socialism is only a stepping stone to Communism.
 
What is the difference between a Liberal or Progressive and a Socialist?
 

The spelling.
 
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.  The concentration of power to The Usurper is a clear indication that his goal is Dictatorship. All power to the Socialist Democrats to enforce the New Correctness. MSNBC will be the Ministry of Truth.
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #13 

The Chinese are still convinced Obama is the second coming of Mao

Zip has a Getty image of tee-shirts showing an image of a revolutionary styled Barack Obama at a stall in Beijing on May 16, 2012. A slew of bleak economic data has raised fears China’s economy is cooling faster than previously thought, but analysts say Beijing has only limited ways of preventing a politically damaging slowdown.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #14 

1996 ad: Obama event sponsored by socialist group

Aaron Klein is reporting that A 1996 print advertisement in a local Chicago newspaper shows Barack Obama was the speaker at an event sponsored and presented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA.
 
The panelists at the 1996 DSA event included Obama, then a candidate for the 13th Illinois Senate District; William Julius Wilson, a longtime DSA activist from the Center for the Study of Urban Inequality at the University of Chicago; Professor Michael Dawson from the University of Chicago; and Professor Joseph Schwartz, a member of DSA’s National Political Committee.
 
According to the archive of the DSA’s March-April 1996 newsletter, New Ground, Obama reportedly addressed a crowd of over 300 people, discussing a theme from his campaign, “What does it take to create productive communities?”  Obama reportedly outlined how government can play “constructive” roles in bettering society.

Top Democratic Socialists of America members have been closely linked for years to Obama.
 
Read more here . . .

 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #15 

Excerpt's from Obama's speech at the above meeting

Bob Roman reported that over three hundred people attended the first of two Town Meetings on Economic Insecurity on February 25 in Ida Noyes Hall at the University of Chicago. Entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America", the meeting was sponsored by the UofC DSA Youth Section, Chicago DSA and University Democrats.

Barack Obama, candidate for the 13th Illinois Senate District observed that Martin Luther King's March on Washington in the 1960s wasn't simply about civil rights but demanded jobs as well. Now the issue is again coming to the front, but he wished the issue was on the Democratic agenda not just on Buchanan's.

One of the themes that has emerged in Barack Obama's campaign is "what does it take to create productive communities", not just consumptive communities. It is an issue that joins some of the best instincts of the conservatives with the better instincts of the left. He felt the state government has three constructive roles to play.

The first is "human capital development". By this he meant public education, welfare reform, and a "workforce preparation strategy". Public education requires equality in funding. It's not that money is the only solution to public education's problems but it's a start toward a solution. The current proposals for welfare reform are intended to eliminate welfare but it's also true that the status quo is not tenable. A true welfare system would provide for medical care, child care and job training. While Barack Obama did not use this term, it sounded very much like the "social wage" approach used by many social democratic labor parties. By "workforce preparation strategy", Barack Obama simply meant a coordinated, purposeful program of job training instead of the ad hoc, fragmented approach used by the State of Illinois today.

The state government can also play a role in redistribution, the allocation of wages and jobs. As Barack Obama noted, when someone gets paid $10 million to eliminate 4,000 jobs, the voters in his district know this is an issue of power not economics. The government can use as tools labor law reform, public works and contracts.

Sounds like a Socialist to me.  Sounds like what Obama said to Joe the Plumber.

And remember, he was a member of the New Party, a Socialist political party, and ran for office under its banner.

But, what do I know?


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Longknife 21

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #16 

Obama lies to the socialists as much as everyone else. Like most modern Totalitarians, socialism is the tool to power, the bait for the idiots in a democracy. His goal is power. Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

FreedomsCall

Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #17 
Simple answer is... YES
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #18 

Obama awards Medal of Freedom to Socialist

 

Lachlan Markay is reporting that Barack Obama awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Tuesday to Dolores Huerta, an 82-year-old labor activist and co-founder of the United Farm Workers union.

 

Huerta is also an honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America.

DSA describes itself as “the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International.”

Huerta has claimed, “Republicans hate Latinos,” and has spoken fondly of Hugo Chavez’s despotic regime in Venezuela. Some of her more radical comments were captured in this audio clip:

 

Despite her apparent radicalism, Huerta has received accolades from top administration officials, including Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. She is now the recipient of the nation’s highest civilian honor -- one of 14 individuals to receive the medal Tuesday at the White House.

 

Hell!  Hilda Solis is a Socialist too!  She was a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus until her appointment as Labor Secretary.

 

Related: Picture of the day -- Obama winks before awarding Presidential Medal of Freedom to Socialist Dolores Huerta

  


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Seriously

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,060
Reply with quote  #19 

Obama Caught Lying Again: He Was Member of 'New Party,' Says Kurtz

Barack Obama was, in fact, a member of the socialist New Party in the 1990s and sought its endorsement for the Illinois senate--contrary to the misrepresentations of Obama's presidential campaign in 2008, and in spite of the efforts of Politico's Ben Smith to quash the story. Stanley Kurtz, author of Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism (2010), has released new "smoking gun" evidence at National Review Online. It is evidence that the mainstream media can no longer ignore--and Obama can no longer deny.

When the story of Obama's association with the New Party first broke in 2008, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt claimed that Obama had never been a member. (LaBolt likewise told the New York Times that Obama had "not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005"--a statement that carefully concealed the truth that Obama had spent time in Ayers' home after he began serving in the Senate.) The Obama campaign took up the issue at its "Fight the Smears" website, smearing Kurtz and willfully distorting the truth about Barack Obama's radical past:

Right-wing hatchet man and conspiracy theorist, Stanley Kurtz is pushing a new crackpot smear against Barack falsely claiming he was a member of something called the New Party.

But the truth is Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party. In all six primary campaigns of his career, Barack has has run as a Democrat. The New Party did support Barack once in 1996, but he was the only candidate on the ballot in his race and never solicited the endorsement.

Ben Smith of Politico wrote a classic "nothing to see here" story, taking LaBolt and New Party founder Joel Rogers at their word. The rest of the mainstream media, eagerly covering up for--and campaigning for--Obama, took Smith's report as the definitive "debunking" of the New Party "smear" and failed to look further. The mocking tone of Smith's article ("The dread New Party") put the topic beyond the pale of polite debate.

Now, through careful archival research, Kurtz has proven his case--and proven once again that there are many people on the left who have been willing to misrepresent and obscure facts about Barack Obama, as well as many in the mainstream media who have acted as Obama's accomplices rather than searching for the truth.

Kurtz writes:

Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:

Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.

Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined...

The revelation in 2008 that Obama had joined an ACORN-controlled, leftist third party could have been damaging indeed, and coming clean about his broader work with ACORN might easily have exposed these New Party ties. Because the work of ACORN and the New Party often intersected with Obama’s other alliances, honesty about his ties to either could have laid bare the entire network of his leftist political partnerships.

Obama was not the only one who lied, according to Kurtz:

Although Obama is ultimately responsible for deceiving the American people in 2008 about his political background, he got help from his old associates. Each of the two former political allies who helped him to deny his New Party membership during campaign ’08 was in a position to know better.

One of the most glaring lies--which Politico's Smith readily accepted--was that the New Party did not have members. That is easily proved false, Kurtz says, with the group's own documents, which he has recovered:

At just about the time Obama joined the New Party, the Chicago chapter was embroiled in a bitter internal dispute. A party-membership list is attached to a memo in which the leaders of one faction consider a scheme to disqualify potential voting members from a competing faction, on the grounds that those voters had not renewed their memberships. The factional leaders worried that their opponents would legitimately object to this tactic, since a mailing that called for members to renew hadn’t been properly sent out. At any rate, the memo clearly demonstrates that, contrary to Rogers’s explanation, membership in the New Party entailed the right to vote on matters of party governance. In fact, Obama’s own New Party endorsement, being controversial, was thrown open to a members’ vote on the day he joined the party.

As for the group's socialist ideology, Kurtz says, the documents he has recovered leave no doubt:

The documents reveal that the New Party’s central aim was to move the United States steadily closer to European social democracy, a goal that Mitt Romney has also attributed to Obama. New Party leaders disdained mainstream Democrats, considering them tools of business, and promised instead to create a partnership between elected officials and local community organizations, with the goal of socializing the American economy to an unprecedented degree.

Kurtz ends by challenging the mainstream media to the opposite of what they did in 2008--to follow up on the facts he has uncovered, and "to report that President Obama once joined a leftist third party, and that he hid that truth from the American people in order to win the presidency." And he hints that there are more facts to come.


__________________
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #20 

Barack Obama was a member of the Socialist New Party

 

Has been in the archive for years

 

Welcome aboard, Stanley.

 

"Kurtz says, the documents he has recovered leave no doubt."

 

HE recovered?  Kurtz' arrogance rivals that of Obama.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #21 

Democrats, ObamaMedia in denial over Obama's Socialist beliefs

Investor's Business Daily says a lengthy feature by the Associated Press earlier this week asked the rather strange question, "Is Obama A Socialist?" A better question might be: Why doesn't the public know it?
 
It should come as no surprise that Barack Obama stands farther left on the political spectrum than any president in history.
 
After all, his $831 billion stimulus, TARP, auto industry takeover, crackdown on Wall Street and the banks, housing market manipulation, ObamaCare, wealth redistribution, and demonization of American business and profits are only a few examples of Obama's abiding belief in leftist principles.
 
What's strange is the mainstream media's continued efforts to debunk the idea that Obama is a socialist -- recently going so far as to liken him to President Reagan, an absurd idea if ever there was one.
 
Fact is, Obama's socialist background runs deep -- as IBD showed in a 21-part series that ran in 2008.
 
Ironically, the AP piece questioning Obama's socialism ran about a week after Obama gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor, to "civil rights" activist Dolores Huerta. She also happens to be honorary chairwoman of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the U.S.' main socialist party and an affiliate of Socialist International.
 
Obama's ties to the DSA go way back. As Accuracy in Media writer Cliff Kincaid noted this week, in 1996 Obama won the endorsement of the Chicago DSA in his run for an Illinois state senate seat.
 
Around that time Obama eulogized Saul Mendelson, "a longtime socialist activist," as a DSA newsletter put it, and appeared on at least one DSA panel.
 
As has been documented, virtually all of Obama's early influences were communist or socialist. His mentor was Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party member. Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr., was a hard-core Marxist. Ditto his mother, Stanley Anne Dunham.
 
In Chicago, where Obama came of political age after attending law school, he likewise gravitated toward leftists, like unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, and the extreme left-wing and America-hating Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
 
And, of course, the future president was an acolyte of firebrand socialist/community organizer Saul Alinsky.
 
Not a socialist? Author Stanley Kurtz cites new (old) evidence from Illinois Acorn records that, in his words, "definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party" in the 1990s. For the record, the New Party was a social democratic party -- that is, socialist.
 
Of course, this is an election year, and politicians in trouble often deny the basic facts of their existence.
 
Yet, as recently as February 2009, Newsweek gloated on its cover, "We're All Socialists Now," a not-so-subtle recognition the just-elected president was one.
 
As far as we know, there were no angry denials to Newsweek by the triumphant Obama White House.
 
Today, fearing Obama will lose the upcoming election because of his poor stewardship of the economy, Democrats and their media allies again pooh-pooh the idea that Obama's a socialist -- as they did in 2008.
 
Sorry, but the evidence suggests otherwise.
 


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Claudia

Registered:
Posts: 1,222
Reply with quote  #22 

IF it walks like a Duck, Squaks like a Duck, then in my opinion it is a DUCK....  and Obama does all three in regards to being a Socialist,   er... Marxist,  ER...COMMUNIST....  perhaps all three depending on who is watching, but definetly at the very least the Socialist is very prominent in O's lifestyle and make-up as well as demeanor......  The Marxist, he only lets out about once every hour or so, and the Communist he only lets that show maybe once a day,  depending on who he is trying to get to vote for him, or impress with his America loving attitude.....  that Socialist hides just beneath the surface and jumps out every time he opens his mouth.  As the saying goes about Blondes, they are dittzes, and can't help but show it, well with Obama, he is a Socialist and seriously can't help but show it every time he opens his mouth,......... in fact he has a very hard time trying to obfuscate his intentions and be a normal American who loves freedom and honor, with EVERY WAKING/LIVING BREATH HE TAKES.....  WHEN HE TOLD McCAIN to get over it, "I WON" that was our first clue and a big one it was.......

Yephora

Registered:
Posts: 190
Reply with quote  #23 
Yes. The prescient Victoria Jackson would go nicely here:

Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #24 

Obama's politics are more insidious than Socialism

Thomas Sowell says it bothers hime a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a "socialist."
 
He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.
 
What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector.
 
Politically, it is heads-I-win when things go right, and tails-you-lose when things go wrong. This is far preferable, from Obama's point of view, since it gives him a variety of scapegoats for all his failed policies, without having to use President Bush as a scapegoat all the time.
 
Government ownership of the means of production means that politicians also own the consequences of their policies, and have to face responsibility when those consequences are disastrous -- something that Barack Obama avoids like the plague.
 
Thus the Obama administration can arbitrarily force insurance companies to cover the children of their customers until the children are 26 years old. Obviously, this creates favorable publicity for President Obama. But if this and other government edicts cause insurance premiums to rise, then that is something that can be blamed on the "greed" of the insurance companies.
 
The same principle, or lack of principle, applies to many other privately owned businesses. It is a very successful political ploy that can be adapted to all sorts of situations.
 
One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left.
 
Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely -- and correctly -- regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg's great book "Liberal Fascism" cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists' consistent pursuit of the goals of the left, and of the left's embrace of the fascists as their own during the 1920s.
 
Mussolini, the originator of fascism, was lionized by the left, both in Europe and in America, during the 1920s. Even Hitler, who adopted fascist ideas in the 1920s, was seen by some, including W.E.B. Du Bois, as a man of the left.
 
It was in the 1930s, when ugly internal and international actions by Hitler and Mussolini repelled the world, that the left distanced themselves from fascism and its Nazi offshoot -- and verbally transferred these totalitarian dictatorships to the right, saddling their opponents with these pariahs.
 
What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people -- like themselves -- need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.
 
The left's vision is not only a vision of the world, but also a vision of themselves, as superior beings pursuing superior ends. In the United States, however, this vision conflicts with a Constitution that begins, "We the People ..."
 
That is why the left has for more than a century been trying to get the Constitution's limitations on government loosened or evaded by judges' new interpretations, based on notions of "a living Constitution" that will take decisions out of the hands of "We the People," and transfer those decisions to our betters.
 
The self-flattery of the vision of the left also gives its true believers a huge ego stake in that vision, which means that mere facts are unlikely to make them reconsider, regardless of what evidence piles up against the vision of the left, and regardless of its disastrous consequences.
 
Only our own awareness of the huge stakes involved can save us from the rampaging presumptions of our betters, whether they are called socialists or fascists. So long as we buy their heady rhetoric, we are selling our birthright of freedom.


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Beckwith

Super Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 24,815
Reply with quote  #25 

Obama tied to architect of U.S. collapse

Aaron Klein says that last week, researcher and author Stanley Kurtz, writing at National Review Online, reported on documentation from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society that "definitively establishes" that Obama was a member of the New Party.
 
Kurtz reported Obama also signed a "contract" promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.
 
A July 20, 1992, article in The Nation magazine by New Party founder Joel Rogers, meanwhile, lays out the case for the establishment of the party and lists several of the group’s early founders and activists.
 
In that article, titled "Out with the Old Politics, in with the New Party," Rogers cites Frances Fox Piven as an early activist in the formation of the New Party, which he describes as a "social democratic" party.
 
Piven, together with her late husband, activist and fellow Columbia professor Richard Cloward, developed the Cloward-Piven Strategy, which called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system.
 
The duo’s stated goal was to agitate a financial crisis that would collapse the U.S economy and replace it with a national system with "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty."
 
Other early New Party activists listed by Rogers have ties to Obama. Those activists and others were also listed as New Party "builders" in the party’ newsletter, the New Party News.
 
Some of the key New Party activists with Obama ties include:
 
 •  Madeline Talbott, listed as national field director of ACORN. Talbott is a former colleague of Obama’s from his 1990s Project Vote! Chicago Coalition, which worked directly with ACORN when Talbott was ACORN’s lead Illinois organizer. She has also written about working with Obama as a fellow Chicago community organizer in the 1990s. Obama himself has linked his work on Project Vote to Talbott’s Illinois ACORN. When he sought the endorsement of ACORN for his 2008 presidential bid, Obama said, "When I ran Project Vote, the voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it."
 
 •  Manning Marable, a socialist Columbia University professor. Marable in 1998 helped found the Black Radical Congress, where he worked with controversial race scholar Cornel West, an Obama friend and 2008 campaign adviser who introduced the politician at his first campaign stop in Harlem.WND disclosedthat during that 2007 introduction, West first railed on stage against the "racist" U.S. criminal justice system of the "American empire."In 2007, Marable was elected chairman of Movement for a Democratic Society, or MDS, an arm of the radical Students for a Democratic Society from which the Weather Underground terrorist organization later splintered. Some Weathermen terrorists, including Bill Ayers, participated in Marable’s MDS.
 
 •  Marxist activist Carl Davidson. Davidson later co-founded Chicagoans Against the War in Iraq, the group that invited Obama to speak at its Oct. 2, 2002, anti-war rally in Chicago – an address that was said to propel Obama to national attention.
 
 •  Quentin Young, key organizer of the Physicians for a National Health Program. Young reportedly was present at a 1995 meeting at the home of Bill Ayers that was said to have launched Obama’s political career. He was an adviser to Obama in the late 1990s. Young himself took credit in March 2009 in an interview with the Democracy Now network for "turning Barack Obama into a ‘single payer’ advocate when the president was an Illinois state senator."
 
The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral "fusion," which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party disbanded in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.
 
The socialist-oriented goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.
 
Among the New Party’s stated objectives were "full employment, a shorter work week and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal ‘social wage’ to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth; and like programs to ensure gender equity."
 
The New Party stated it also sought "the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets [and] community-controlled alternative financial institutions."
 
Many of the New Party’s founding members were Democratic Socialists of America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA.
 
Last month, WND reported on a 1996 print advertisement in a local Chicago newspaper that shows Obama was the speaker at an event sponsored and presented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA.

Excerpt -- read the entire article here . . .


__________________
A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Help fight the
ObamaMedia

The United States Library of Congress
has selected TheObamaFile.com for inclusion
in its historic collection of Internet materials

Be a subscribing
member

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011 - 2016
All rights reserved