Leftists go nuts at Allen West’s comparison of Progressive Caucus with Communists

April 17, 2012 04:44


Rep. West has stirred up a hornet’s nest of indignation from progressive commentators and pundits when he said members of congress in the Progressive Caucus were no different then Communists.

What West said was “It’s a good question. I believe there’s about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party. It’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus.”  Most leftist bloggers have left out the part about the Progressive caucus. West has not backed down and is being labeled as a “McCarthyite.”

Consider:

Wolf Blitzer Should Apologize to Allen West

By Cliff Kincaid

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer played the role of wise guy during a segment last Thursday on Rep. Allen West and communism. West “sounds like McCarthy,” Blitzer said, referring to his allegations of communists in Congress. The comment was designed to ridicule West, a combat veteran of the Iraq War and a man considered by many Republicans to be vice-presidential material. Blitzer urged West to issue a public apology.

 

But Blitzer is the one who should apologize, for he did not offer West’s comments in context. Blitzer also ignored clear and convincing evidence that the Communist Party USA, once funded by Moscow, regards the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Democratic Party as allies in the “struggle” for socialism in the U.S.

 

“What’s the difference between the CPUSA and progressive Democrats?” asked CPUSA writer Dan Margolis. “The CPUSA has worked to get Democrats elected, fought for health care reform with the public option, and embraced most of what organized labor has been doing.”

 

In the article, described as part of the discussion leading up to the Communist Party USA’s 29th National Convention in 2010, he goes on, “The strategy is pro-active, as well. Having looked at the current troubles, and the demoralization that has occurred since the 2008 elections, our line is even more important: Obama and the Democrats are not the enemy; they represent better possibilities for working people than the Republicans.”

 

If anything, then, West understated the problem. The CPUSA is working through the Democratic Party as a whole, as well as the Obama Administration. And we have their admission of all of this.

 

Taking the usual liberal line—that communism is dead and that talk of a communist threat today is just plain nuts—the CNN host of “The Situation Room” displayed his ignorance and bias.

 

Addressing West’s remarks about communism, Blitzer said, “There’s virtually no,” before cutting himself off in mid-sentence and referring to the collapse of communism in Russia. He must have stopped, knowing that it would be foolish to say communism itself was dead when the world had been transfixed by the spectacle of the communist North Korean regime launching another missile.

 

It would also seem preposterous to talk about the collapse of communism internationally when, in addition to North Korea, there are communist regimes in China and Cuba. Plus, Russia is run by a former Soviet intelligence officer who is the president-elect of that country and starts a new six-year term on May 7.

 

In addition, we have cases like that of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, a Marxist aligned with Cuba and Russia.

 

And if there is no communist presence in the U.S. today, then why did a spokesman for the Communist Party USA give a quote to the left-wing paper Politico denouncing West?

 

In a story headlined, “Communist Party slams Allen West,” Politico reporter Darius Dixon quoted a CPUSA spokesman as saying about members of the party in Congress: “There aren’t any now and if there were in the future does that mean that the voters don’t have a say?”

 

Blitzer showed his guests, Democratic strategist Maria Cardona along with Republican strategist Bay Buchanan, partial footage of West’s remarks: “I believe there are 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party.”

 

Buchanan said, “He has not chosen the best of words. This is a man who is clearly a great American hero, a war hero, but this is a statement I couldn’t agree with.”

 

Buchanan added, “I would almost like to see what he said following that and did he explain it?”

 

Well, of course he did. And Blitzer would finally acknowledge that the West quote was about the progressive caucus in Congress. But Blitzer wasn’t convinced: “But you agree, when he says members of the Communist Party, members of the—he should apologize. He should take it back.”

 

As AIM has reported, West was referring to members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.  He later issued a statement more fully explaining what he meant. Still, one cannot subject West’s remarks to scrutiny without analyzing why members of the caucus like Rep. Danny Davis accept awards from the Communist Party USA.

 

Cardona commented, “He seemed pretty sure of himself in that quote and that sound bite. It was almost as if he had seen the cards, Wolf, of the card-carrying members” of the party.

 

This was the time for Blitzer to provide a history lesson, but he failed to do so. Since he was not interested in bringing forth the case of Davis, he could have mentioned Hugh DeLacy.

 

A Democratic member of Congress from 1945 to 1947, DeLacy was a CPUSA member, but his party membership was only confirmed after he left the House. After he left Congress, he moved from Washington state to California and lived in a congressional district served by then-Rep. Leon Panetta. Back in 1983 Panetta inserted a tribute into the Congressional Record recognizing DeLacy and his wife Dorothy, another communist, for their commitment to “social justice” and resisting “the dark forces of McCarthyism.” Panetta had provided DeLacy a sensitive congressional document dealing with military affairs.

 

Challenging “the dark forces of McCarthyism” is interesting language for an official who is supposed to be able to recognize enemies, foreign and domestic. Panetta has served as CIA director and now Secretary of Defense in the Obama Administration, presiding over massive defense cuts. Paying homage to DeLacy helps clear up the mystery of how and why he was selected by Obama to occupy these sensitive national security positions.

 

The case of Hugh DeLacy, whose membership in the party was later confirmed by CPUSA lawyer John Abt, may help explain why the party spokesman told Politico that there aren’t any party members in Congress “now.” But that technical correction of West’s remarks doesn’t undermine his final point about what the Congressional Progressive Caucus represents. Communists like to call themselves progressives.

 

If there is any doubt, put the word “progressive” into the CPUSA search engine and see how many times it comes up. I found 68 references.

 

Although Blitzer used the phrase “sounds like McCarthy” in order to mock West, it bears repeating that the communist threat was much greater than even Sen. Joseph McCarthy had feared. The Venona transcripts of communications among Soviet spies in the U.S., many recruited by the Communist Party, and Moscow, demonstrated as many as 350 infiltrators, including numerous high-level government officials. 

 

With some prominent exceptions such as Democratic Rep. Danny Davis, members of Congress do not advertise their work or affiliations with the CPUSA these days. However, as West noted, the party has referred to “our allies in Congress, the Progressive Caucus, and John Conyers,” the Congressman from Michigan who participated in events sponsored by the U.S. Peace Council, the CPUSA front.

 

The problem is actually much worse than that.

 

In 2008, CPUSA members such as Joelle Fishman, chair of the political action commission of the CPUSA, openly campaigned for Barack Obama. She wrote, “It was enjoyable to knock on doors and find voters who were enthusiastic and inspired by Obama’s historic candidacy…” They were inspired because they knew that Obama was mentored in Hawaii by CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis. This was the open secret our media concealed during the 2008 campaign. Professor Paul Kengor will try to bring it back into public view with the release this summer of a book on Davis.

 

Fishman gave me an interview six months ago talking about the party’s direction in this presidential campaign. It took place at a “progressive” conference that featured Van Jones. The CPUSA is not fielding its own presidential candidate this year, out of deference to Obama.

 

Trevor Loudon points out that “Joelle Fishman is the daughter-in-law of Soviet spy Victor Perlo. Her role within the Communist Party involves coordinating efforts to elect ‘progressive’ Democrats to state and national office and seeing that the Democrats adopt Communist Party inspired policies.”

 

Communist writer Dan Margolis himself noted, “…the fact that people confuse us with progressive Democrats is good; it means that we’ve tapped into mainstream sentiment; we’re not off in left field.”

 

But now that Rep. West has made that same point in a public venue, the CPUSA and the Congressional Progressive Caucus are crying foul. The media echo the party line.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.

 

And consider:

 

Dear Mr. Mataconis at ‘Outside the Beltway’: I eagerly await your apology to Rep. Allen West by Doug Ross

 

Doug Mataconis at Outside the Beltway is outraged — outraged! — that so few Republicans have condemned Allen West’s linkage of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) to Communism.

Just to recap, last week Rep. Allen West (R-FL) — one of the rising stars in Congress — publicly tied the CPC to the Communist agenda:

He had the intestinal fortitude to call the Congressional Progressive Caucus Communists…

…The cries from the Democrats can be heard far and wide – calling West irresponsible for calling patriots Communists. Just one small problem – the Congressional Progressive Caucus was founded in 1991 by Bernie Sanders, who is an avowed Socialist and a Congressman from Vermont; Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and the radical Washington DC based “think tank,” Institute for Policy Studies (IPS).

….

It doesn’t take much work to prove West right:

According to The Weekly Worker (the Communist Party newsletter of Britain), “…The [Congressional Progressive Caucus] CPC is ‘organised around the principles of social and economic justice’, a ‘non-discriminatory society’ and ‘national priorities which represent the interests of all people, not just the wealthy and powerful’.” … the CPC platform is “strongly supported by the Communist Party of the United States of America… The CPUSA has served in effect as a loyal tendency inside the Democratic Party for over half a century.”

 

There really isn’t much sting to the labels of socialist, Marxist or communist these days. Many union protests and virtually all of the Occupy movement protests had banners proudly proclaiming the virtues of socialism, Marxism, Communism, Progressivism.

Our own president stated in his memoir that he had sought out Marxist professors in college and went to socialist events. So what’s the big deal? Most Democrats are socialists.

Scribd.com still has a pdf from October 2009 of the Democrat Socialists of America which named 70 members of congress as being members.

Consider our previous article from November 2010:

Gallup poll: Democrats are mostly socialists

A majority of Democrats and liberals say they have a positive view of socialism according to a recent Gallup poll. That socialist majority of the left is about 36% of the US.

Some call themselves progressives or liberals but some are proud to wear the socialist name. here is a little of what freedom lovers are up against.

MSNBC anchor Lawrence O’Donnell proudly proclaims that he is a socialist who is far to the left of liberals.

AFL-CIO leader and Obama ally Richard Trumka is proud to work with European socialists to create a global tax.

Left’s One Nation Rally in Washington proudly featured socialists and communists. The list of organizations offering their official endorsements for Saturday’s “One Nation” rally reads like a who’s who of the far-left in America, including some usual suspects.

The NEA teachers union was founded by socialists and promoted Marxist Saul Alinsky’s book ‘Rules for Radicals‘ on its website.

“Progressives for Obama, formed during Obama’s presidential bid. It was loaded with and even founded by some hardcore communists from the 1960s. Consider merely two of them: Tom Hayden, one of the group’s four founders, and Mark Rudd, one of the 94 original signers. Hayden and Rudd had been leaders of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), which subverted the policies and plans of Democratic presidents ranging from Vietnam to the 1968 convention. In 2008, both Hayden and Rudd suddenly reemerged as “Progressives for Obama.” – Paul Kengor at American Thinker.

“I believe most Americans find the ideals and principles of socialism, communism and progressivism repugnant, but by our sanctioning greater government centralization and its control over our lives, we become their dupes or, as Lenin said, “useful idiots.”” – Walter Williams.

The Gallup poll said:

“Socialism had the lowest percentage positive rating and the highest negative rating of any term tested. Still, more than a third of Americans say they have a positive image of socialism.

Exactly how Americans define “socialism” or what exactly they think of when they hear the word is not known. The research simply measures Americans’ reactions when a survey interviewer reads the word to them — an exercise that helps shed light on connotations associated with this frequently used term.

There are significant differences in reactions to “socialism” across ideological and partisan groups:

A majority of 53% of Democrats have a positive image of socialism, compared to 17% of Republicans.

Sixty-one percent of liberals say their image of socialism is positive, compared to 39% of moderates and 20% of conservatives.”

 

Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D MI), chair of the powerful House Judiciary Committee has been caught on tape, meeting with members of the U.S.’s largest marxist organization Democratic Socialists of America.

Barbara Lee is a pro-socialist Democratic member of Congress.

A group of left wing radicals assembled at a conference in Washington, D.C. under the banner of the Campaign for America’s Future. This group was a Who’s, Who’s of the progressive/ socialist movement in America.

American unions have a history of association with socialism. Andy Stern former head of SEIU and most frequent visitor to the Obama White House wants to ’share wealth’ and uses the communist slogan ‘workers of the world unite‘. Stern also worked for AFL-CIO which became a progressive/ socialist organization when John Sweeney, a member of Democratic Socialists of America, took over.

And who could forget the self avowed communist who was Obama’s ‘Green Jobs Czar’ and on the White House staff Van Jones. When Jones’ communist background came to light he was moved over to the progressive/ socialist think tank Center for American Progress which is headed by Obama’s confidant and former advisor John Podesta.

Then there is Obama ‘Diversity Czar’ appointee at the FCC Mark Lloyd. Lloyd was caught on video praising the Chavez takeover of Venezuela. That video has been scrubbed from the internet but a Washington Times article notes that Lloyd praised socialist dictator Hugo Chavez’s rise to power in Venezuela as “an incredible revolution.”

And don’t forget the Mao Tse Tung Christmas ornament hanging on the White House Christmas tree. Or Anita Dunn, when she was the White House Communications Director,  saying Mao Tse Tung was one of the two people she turns to most.

Here is an excerpt of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto’:

Manifesto of the Communist Party

‘The Communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations; no wonder that its development involved the most radical rupture with traditional ideas.

But let us have done with the bourgeois objections to Communism.

We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy.

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.’

 

See anything familiar? A specter is haunting America – the specter of socialism.

 

And now take a deeper look at our own president from a previous post:

 

Obama is a socialist. Merriam-Webster defines socialism as “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or government ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.” A socialist is “one who advocates or practices socialism.

Accuracy in Media was one of the earliest to recognize and expose the socialist/Marxist early connections of Obama with posts like Conservatives Behind the Curve on ObamaThe Marxist Roots of Obama’s Rage, Part One , The Marxist Roots of Obama’s Rage, Part Two , and Exposing Un-American Activities.

A Townhall.com article by Terry Jeffrey the Editor-in-chief of CNSNews.com cries ‘Hannity’s Right: Obama Is a Socialist‘. Mr. Jeffrey points out that Hannity has been claiming that Obama is a socialist for some time.:

Obama, for example, practiced socialism with General Motors.

Last year, he directed the government to take 60 percent ownership of GM. Congress had not enacted legislation authorizing him to do this. He simply took money out of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which had been appropriated to buy assets from financial institutions (not manufacturers), and bought the federal government an auto company.

Obama’s greatest socialist act so far, however, is the national health care system he signed into law last month.

Recent books expose like Stanley Kurtz Radical-in-Chief research the socialist past of Obam. Another book, Dupes by Paul Kengor, makes use of Obama’s communist mentor, Communist Party USA member Frank Marshall Davis which was first exposed by New Zeal blogger Trevor Loudon.

Even the mainstream Forbes ran an article proclaiming Obama as a Fabian Socialist as early as the day before the 2008 election. Considering what has happened in the two years since this was written it is amazingly prophetic:

Fabians believed in gradual nationalization of the economy through manipulation of the democratic process. Breaking away from the violent revolutionary socialists of their day, they thought that the only real way to effect “fundamental change” and “social justice” was through a mass movement of the working classes presided over by intellectual and cultural elites. Before TV it was stage plays, written by George Bernard Shaw and thousands of inferior “realist” playwrights dedicated to social change.

That’s the Fabian MO, relentless cultural and journalistic attacks on everything that is, and then a hard pitch for the hope of what might be.

That’s Obama’s world.

He’s telling the truth when he says that he doesn’t agree with Bill Ayers’ violent bombing tactics, but it’s a tactical disagreement. Why use dynamite when mass media and community organizing work so much better?

So here is the playbook: The left will identify, freeze, personalize and polarize an industry, probably health care. It will attempt to nationalize one-fifth of the U.S. economy through legislative action. They will focus, as Lenin did, on the “commanding heights” of the economy, not the little guy.

It may not be health care first; it might be energy, though I suspect that energy will be nationalized much more gradually. The offshore drilling ban that was allowed to lapse legislatively will be reinstated through executive means. It may be an executive order, but might just as well be a permit reviewing system that theoretically allows drilling but with endless levels of objection and appeal from anti-growth groups. Wind and solar, on the other hand, will have no permitting problems at all, and a heavy taxpayer subsidy at their backs.

And now the popular American Thinker site ran an article by Dupes author Paul Kengor relating the interview with Obama’s fellow Marxist from his days at’Moscow of southern California’ Occidental College:

Kengor: You said that Obama was introduced to you at Occidental College as a Marxist? Because you were one [a Marxist] at that point?

 

Drew: Yeah, that’s embarrassing for me, but I studied Marxist economics when I was at the University of Sussex in England. I had a junior-year scholarship over there and I did my senior honors thesis on Marxist economics when I was at Occidental College. And I also founded [the] Democratic Student Socialist Alliance, you know, under a different name, in 1976.

 

Kengor: John, now you had told me before, and I’m reading from my own book here, “Obama was already an ardent Marxist when I met him in the fall of 1980. [Quotation from above continued.]“

 

Drew: Yeah, that’s exactly right. Obama believed, at the time I met him — this was probably around Christmastime in 1980 — because, you know, I had flown out during Christmas break from Cornell, where I was doing my graduate work. Young Obama was looking forward to an imminent social revolution — literally a movement where the working classes would overthrow the ruling class and institute a kind of socialist utopia in the United States. I mean, that’s how extreme his views were his sophomore year of college.

 

Kengor: And you would know this because you were a comrade, so to speak.

 

Drew: Yeah, I was a comrade, but I was kind of more what Michael Savage called the “Frankfurt School” of Marxism at the time. I was, you know, I felt like I was doing Obama a favor by pointing out that the Marxist revolution that he and [our friends] were hoping for was really kind of a pipe dream, and that there was nothing in European history or the history of developed nations that would make that sort of fantasy — you know, Frank Marshall Davis fantasy of revolution — come true.

And there was the slip up Obama had with Joe the plumber during the election where he revealed his true philosophy of ’spread the wealth around’. And he is doing plenty of that. Every major bill Obama supports is a transfer of wealth. They either take directly from those who have money and give it to others or he uses deficit spending to force future generations to pay it. As Alan Greenspan said “Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth.”

Obama and his Socialist Democrats know this. Yet Mitt Romney still refuses to call Obama a socialist. Is he afraid he will hurt Obama’s feelings? Is he afraid he will be called a racist? Or is it that since Romney is a Progressive and a progressive is essentially a socialist that Romney just doesn’t know the difference?

Rick Perry has called Obama a socialist. Gingrich has called his policies socialist. Bachmann has said Obama “has ushered in socialism.” Is Romney clueless or afraid to fight?

We have a president who promised a plan that would ‘skyrocket’ electricity rates, and uses the  EPA that bases its illegal and tyrannical power grab on fraudulent data and suppressed any dissent to push his agenda, and an administration that is collectively working to ruin the oil, steel, coal, and cement industries. An administration that ignores the will of the people and its congress and seems to be doing all it can to destroy jobs and the economy while promising to make jobs and economic growth its first priority.

Just look at the ideologues Obama chooses as his advisers.  His cabinets are pushing “environmental justice” as a scheme for redistributing wealth. His energy secretary Steven Chu is on the record as having said we need higher gas prices like those in Europe. Obama warned us during his 2008 campaign that “under my plan electricity rates will necessarily have to skyrocket.” Obama hired an anti-commerce commerce secretary in John Bryson.

Obama also picked a “spread the wealth” progressive lawyer for his top economist.

Saying “We haven’t heard this kind of talk except from pure socialists” Wynn Resorts CEO Steve Wynn railed against Obama’s redistributionist anti-business policies. Wynn, a Democrat,  says:

“But I’m afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. I’m saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business and progress and job creation in my lifetime. Well this is Obama’s deal, and it’s Obama that’s responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don’t invest or holding too much money. We haven’t heard this kind of talk except from pure socialists”

Speaking of businessmen, Charles Gasparino a senior correspondent for Fox business Network had this exchange with John Stossel:

“If you talk to some of these guys, you talk to Jamie Diamond the CEO of JP Morgan Chase, big Obama supporter, he said listen I voted for Obama because yes I wanted change. I wanted to help people. I didn’t want to create new entitlements you know, I didn’t want to sort of redistribute wealth.

This is what they really thought. They thought he was a moderate.

You know what I said to these guys? I said have you ever heard of Jeremiah Wright? I mean Jeremiah Wright, his racist rhetoric, its there, but he’s also a Marxist. He teaches liberation theology. How can you vote for a man who considers, and you’re a businessman, considers a Marxist to be his spiritual mentor?”

Bernie Marcus Home Depot co-founder told Neil Cavuto that we will never be able to pay off this debt and that if we continue these policies we will be ‘dead in the water’. ‘I don’t know what he’s smoking’ he said of VP Biden’s stimulus propaganda. He said Obama administration doesn’t “have a clue” on small business.

This is collectivism also known as Marxism. All income belongs to the group, the collective to be redistributed as the government determines what is “fair.” This was Obama’s purpose in spending so much. His argument now is that we must tax (take more) to pay for the spending he has done.

Obama has surrounded himself with Socialists, Marxists and Communists. Yes it sounds extreme but consider:

Anita Dunn former White House interim communications director and chief Fox-basher who praised communist China’s revolutionary murderer Mao as one of her two favorite political philosophers. Or Bill Ayers early Obama friend, political supporter and unrepentant domestic terrorist who coauthored the Weather Underground Manifesto. Author Stanley Kurtz exposed the influence of Bill Ayers in the political development of Barack Obama.

White House Christmas Tree

And can we really believe that Obama was unaware of the Mao ornament on the White House Christmas tree?

His appointments reflect his socialist Marxist ideology. His science czar, Holdren, and his recent appointment to Medicare & Medicaid, Berwick have both espoused beliefs in the ’spread the wealth’ philosophy which is Marxism. Marxism is inherently anti-business.

Obama’s pick for his top economic advisory position, Gene Sperling, is a ’spread the wealth’ attorney with little real economic experience. Sperling wrote “Those who create great wealth do so on the backs and shoulders of previous generations of taxpayers…” and “The notion that ‘you earned it’ is more correctly, ‘you earned it with the indispensable help of the government.’”

Sperling is also a former Fellow at The Center for American Progress which is a George Soros funded left wing think tank that includes radical communists like Van Jones a former Obama White House staffer.

Among Obama’s leading advisers were the head of Center for American Progress John Podesta and at least ten additional CAP experts. Bloomberg wrote about it as the Soros-Funded Democratic Idea Factory Becomes Obama Policy Font.

The plain and simple truth is that Obama is a Marxist. He told us in the campaign that he wanted to ’spread the wealth around’. He sat at the feet of avowed Marxist Jeremiah Wright for 20 years and claimed him as a mentor. He had a self proclaimed communist revolutionary on his White House staff as a ‘Green Jobs’ czar in Van Jones. In his own book Obama states that he sought out ‘The Marxist Professors’ in college and points out that he ‘went to socialist conferences’.

Even the mainstream Forbes ran an article proclaiming Obama as a Fabian Socialist as early as the day before the 2008 election. Considering what has happened in the two years since this was written it is amazingly prophetic:

Fabians believed in gradual nationalization of the economy through manipulation of the democratic process. Breaking away from the violent revolutionary socialists of their day, they thought that the only real way to effect “fundamental change” and “social justice” was through a mass movement of the working classes presided over by intellectual and cultural elites. Before TV it was stage plays, written by George Bernard Shaw and thousands of inferior “realist” playwrights dedicated to social change.

That’s the Fabian MO, relentless cultural and journalistic attacks on everything that is, and then a hard pitch for the hope of what might be.

That’s Obama’s world.

He’s telling the truth when he says that he doesn’t agree with Bill Ayers’ violent bombing tactics, but it’s a tactical disagreement. Why use dynamite when mass media and community organizing work so much better?

So here is the playbook: The left will identify, freeze, personalize and polarize an industry, probably health care. It will attempt to nationalize one-fifth of the U.S. economy through legislative action. They will focus, as Lenin did, on the “commanding heights” of the economy, not the little guy.

It may not be health care first; it might be energy, though I suspect that energy will be nationalized much more gradually. The offshore drilling ban that was allowed to lapse legislatively will be reinstated through executive means. It may be an executive order, but might just as well be a permit reviewing system that theoretically allows drilling but with endless levels of objection and appeal from anti-growth groups. Wind and solar, on the other hand, will have no permitting problems at all, and a heavy taxpayer subsidy at their backs.

Alan Greenspan explains the Obama anti-business game plane in his prescient 1966 article  “Gold and Economic Freedom“:

“Stripped of its academic jargon, the welfare state is nothing more than a mechanism by which governments confiscate the wealth of the productive members of a society to support a wide variety of welfare schemes. A substantial part of the confiscation is effected by taxation. But the welfare statists were quick to recognize that if they wished to retain political power, the amount of taxation had to be limited and they had to resort to programs of massive deficit spending, i.e., they had to borrow money, by issuing government bonds, to finance welfare expenditures on a large scale.

Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth.”

How could any reasonable person think that Obama cares anything about business? To Obama and his leftover sixties hippie advisers who have spent their entire lives either in the shelter of government or in quasi governmental academia, business is evil and the manifestation of all that is wrong with capitalism.

More recently we have Obama explaining his socialist vision in saying the government should determine how much money you should be “allowed” to keep.

Obama’s idea of taxation is ideological not revenue. In his campaign he noted that he wanted to raise capital gains tax to be “fair” even if it meant LESS tax revenue.

This is why a recent focus group by Frank Lutz showed that more people are realizing Obama really is a socialist. Consider these quotes from political leaders;

Rep. Allen West: “I’m Sick & Tired of This Marxist Demagogic Rhetoric of the President”

Rep. Allen West rips Obama again – “low level socialist agitator”

Obama “is anti-business…it’s starting to look Marxist to me,” – National Black Chamber of Commerce founder

Rep. Bachmann says Obama ‘has ushered in socialism’

“I can’t believe what he says anymore” – Jim DeMint on Obama – “pure socialism”

Hopefully mainstream America is waking up to the fact that Obama is far out of the mainstream. Far left.

Are we going to believe what they SAY or what they DO?

By Michael Whipple, Editor usACTIONnews.com


Follow Michael Whipple on Twitter

Follow usACTIONnews on Twitter or on Facebook

 

 

 



Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere:

Interested In Further Reading? Click Here

1 Comment

  • Cameron Wade

    About time someone had balls to say it in Public. What about the lawyers admitting to the Forged Birth Certificate or the 2 Social Security Numbers. Know wonder all these bills are being brought up to destroy our Constitution and use it as toilet paper. Pull em out and you don’t have to Impeach Em. Arrest em. That is why the Secret Service Scandal was put into play and why Joe Biden Son the same day issued a decree in Delaware as being Attorney General. Thad County Sheriffs did not have arrest powers? Because outside the 10 mile radius any County Sheriff can arrest him.

Leave a Reply