When Will the Big Media Investigate Obama's Communist Influences?

[Beetle]

When Will the Big Media Investigate Obama's Communist Influences?

By Bill Steigerwald
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, June 09, 2008

Two weeks ago Cliff Kincaid, president of the conservative group America’s Survival Inc., called a press conference in Washington to challenge the mainstream media to look into the hard-core left-wingers who are known to have influenced Barack Obama -- first as a teenager in Hawaii and later in Chicago. Specifically, Kincaid’s group wants a major news organization to follow up on the investigative work it has done that documents that an elderly black man who mentored Sen. Obama in Hawaii was a lifelong member of the Communist Party USA. Kincaid also would like to see a serious journalistic vetting of Sen. Obama’s relationship with the left-wing radicals in Chicago -- Bill Ayers and others -- who helped Obama launch his political career. I called Kincaid -- whose challenge to the media has yet to be accepted -- on Wednesday, June 4, at his home in southern Maryland.

Q: Can you briefly sum up what you have discovered about Obama’s ideological influences that you say need to be checked out by Big Media?
A: We think all the major candidates should be examined for their ties to foreign and hostile elements. In the case of Obama, he has gotten a very, very favorable press. The media seem reluctant to dig into his background, even though he is relatively new on the political scene. What we discovered, in two different places -- first in Hawaii, where he went to high school, and in Chicago, where he started his political career -- is that he is right in the middle of communist networks. In Hawaii, he was mentored by a member of the Communist Party by the name of Frank Marshall Davis. In Chicago, his career was launched and he was close friends with a number of communists and socialists.

Q: What specifically did your investigation find out about Davis, who Obama calls only “Frank” in his memoir “Dreams from My Father”?
A: What was very disturbing to us was the fact that Barack Obama had covered up the true identity of this “Frank” who played such a role in his life just before he went off to college (in the late 1970s). There are several references in his book to this “Frank.” We discovered that “Frank” was indeed Frank Marshall Davis, who was a member of a Soviet-sponsored communist network on the island of Hawaii. We think Obama should be asked to explain why he didn’t reveal Frank’s true identity in his book. We looked into this and had confirmed by several sources that Frank was indeed Frank Marshall Davis, and that he had a considerable influence on Obama. But we cannot really get a rational explanation of why Obama would cover up the identity of this Stalinist agent.

Q: How do you know for sure Davis was a member of the Communist Party USA?
A: We have several different sources confirming that Frank Marshall Davis was a Communist Party member. We have congressional hearings and investigations. Plus we have those who have written about Davis, including John Edgar Tidwell, who wrote a whole book -- a sympathetic book -- about Davis but discussed his membership in the Communist Party. Davis of course was asked about this when he was called before a Senate committee, but he took the Fifth Amendment rather than discuss it openly. There’s no question that he was a key member of this Moscow-sponsored communist network in Hawaii.

Q: What was the most subversive or most dangerous-to-America thing Davis ever did?
A: Davis was an unrepentant communist. He stayed with the Communist Party even after the Hitler-Stalin pact. That’s why I refer to him as “a Stalinist agent.” Other prominent black Americans who had gotten into the Communist Party had left it. For example, Langston Hughes and Richard Wright got involved in communist activities but then broke with the Communist Party because it had become an apologist for some horrible crimes not only committed by Stalin but by the Soviet system. Yet Frank Marshall Davis stayed with the party and wrote some infamous poems not only defending the Soviet Union but attacking the United States.

Q: Is there anything to lead you to believe that Davis made a concerted effort to indoctrinate Obama?
A: What we know is that Barack Obama’s grandfather introduced Obama to Frank Marshall Davis because Barack Obama needed someone to look up to. Remember, this was a time when Barack Obama’s black father had abandoned his family. Barack Obama’s grandfather thought that Davis would fulfill the role of male role model and mentor -- and that’s the role that he played.

Q: When Barack Obama got to Chicago he came into contact with '60s radicals William Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn. What is most worrisome about their possible influence on Obama?
A: It really begins even before Obama gets to Chicago because according to his book, when he goes to college -- first Occidental College and later Columbia University -- he picks among his friends Marxist professors. Obama himself admits this. He also admits attending socialist conferences. That would suggest the influence that Davis had on Obama extended into his college and university years.

Now when he gets to Chicago, we find that once again he gravitates and comes into the company of the most extreme anti-American elements, including socialists and communists. Keep in mind that the Weather Underground terrorists, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, were communist terrorists. They were not just '60s radicals. These were people who openly supported the communist enemy killing Americans in Vietnam. Some of the members in this group, including Dohrn, had traveled to Havana, Cuba, to get instructions from the communists about how to wage their campaign in the United States.

Q: What was Obama’s relationship with Ayers and Dohrn and how close was it?
A: The big question is whether there is a connection between the communist network in Hawaii that included Frank Marshall Davis and the communist network in Chicago that would also come to include Barack Obama. We know that according to the public evidence that Obama launches his political career in Chicago at the home of Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers. Other people who were there include then-state Sen. Alice Palmer and a Dr. Quentin Young. Those two people are almost as significant as Ayers and Dohrn.

We have two reports that state Sen. Palmer had been involved in a Communist Party front group called the U.S Peace Council and had actually made a trip to the old Soviet Union. Dr. Quentin Young had been accused of involvement and membership in the Communist Party, and he refused to answer as well when he was called before a committee to explain his financial support for radicals who were behind the riots in Chicago at the Democratic National Convention back in 1968. So we have got four controversial people launching Obama’s political career in Chicago who were involved in socialist or communist activities.

Q: You are not making the claim that Obama is a communist or a “Manchurian Candidate”-type communist or anything else?
A: We are only raising the questions that the media will not look into. We think the media should examine both candidates. But in the case of Obama, who has only been a U.S. senator for a few years, there is more of a responsibility to inform the public about where he had come from. Remember, as president, he will be entitled to see all of our state secrets. And yet, as a candidate, he doesn’t have to undergo a background or security check. That’s why we depend on the media really to vet these candidates, so the American people can know who they are voting for.

On the question about Obama being a communist or a Marxist, of course we never came to any conclusions about that or offered any evidence one way or the other; that wasn’t our purpose. But it’s important to note that when Obama did run for the Senate in 2004, his opponent at the time, Alan Keyes, had charged that Obama was a Marxist. Obama dismissed it. He almost laughed it off. But he certainly has in my view the responsibility and obligation to explain these associations and why it is that he lands right in the middle of two different communist networks -- one in Hawaii, where he is growing up, and one in Chicago, where he’s launching his political career.

It could be that this is all a coincidence -- that it’s just accidental that he seems to get right in the middle with associations with these anti-American characters. But then again, maybe it’s not an accident. He has to answer some of these concerns and our media have to begin by subjecting him to the scrutiny that they apply to somebody like McCain and other candidates.

Q: Dana Milbank of The Washington Post covered your press conference and wrote a sarcastic piece that said you were engaging in “guilt by association.” What’s your response to that?
A: You know, I asked G. Gordon Liddy when I did his radio show about some of these issues that we are raising. Liddy of course used to be an FBI agent, and he said the FBI would always examine somebody’s associations when they looked at somebody to determine if they were suitable for federal employment. They would look for contacts with foreign countries, foreign individuals, hostile governments and hostile intelligence services. They would look at the question of whether this individual is really loyal to the United States.

We’re asking some of these questions about Obama, and we will continue to ask them, because people like Milbank -- who may not really be a serious journalist -- clearly are not interested. He had made it clear in previous columns that he is a big Obama supporter and there are many like him in the major media, which made our news briefing even more important. We not only have issued our two reports and put them on our Web site, usasurvival.org, but we will be putting up video of the whole press conference so that people can take a look and make their own conclusions and not have to rely on the media to filter what we said.

Q: If you could get Tim Russert on “Meet the Press” to ask Sen. Obama a question about these early influences, what would it be?
A: I think the big question would be, “Why, Sen. Obama, did you cover up the identity of Frank Marshall Davis in your book?” If this had been an innocent association -- if this had just been some guy that Obama came across and realized, “Well, look, he’s just some kind of crazy communist. And, yeah, I had some meeting with him and he gave me advice on various things. But he didn’t have any impact on me. And I went off to college and it had no lasting effect.” That would be one thing.

But that’s not how Obama handled it. Instead he talks about “Frank” as someone who gave him serious advice, including not to believe in the American way of life and that black people had a right to hate white people. These were things according to Obama that Frank told him. Rather than deal with that kind of advice in his book, and analyze the motivations of Frank and identify him by his full name, Obama covers up his true identity. Why?

---

Bill Steigerwald is the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review's associate editor. Call him at (412) 320-7983. E-mail him at: bsteigerwald@tribweb.com.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...D-9DF4E7294999

[Beetle]

How can a person like this get elected? I know the far left has huge influence in the demoratic Primary, but are all the voters in the dP commie? Or are a lot of them just so freakin' stupit, they don't know the difference between Capitalism, socialism, and communism?

[Backstop]

They're just plain "freakin' stupit."

Almost everyone I work with is a Dem - and most have absolutely no idea about politics other than what CNN and the Union Hall tells them.

About 2 weeks ago, we were having one of our political discussions.

Taxes became the topic, and I told them the Dems are trying to pass the largest tax increase in U.S. history.

Man, they looked like a bunch of elementary school kids that had just been told that summer vacation was cancelled.

Some people have absolutely no clue…

[Beetle]

I concur. The vast majority are freakin' stupit. They let the commie socialist pigs lead them around by the nose.

[Brian Baldwin]

Most dems still believe that the democratic party is still what it was back in the 50's. But in fact I believe it died with the assassination of Robert Kennedy. I live in an area full of dems and they really believe everything the news channels say. And if you try to show them that they can get more reliable information elsewhere, their eyes glaze over and they begin to drool and mumble.

So not only are they stupid... They're intentionally stupid. And that just pisses me off. I really dislike when people take pride in their own ignorance.

[Aplomb]

I voted "stupid".

Here's more material for your thread, Beetle, additional questionable connections besides communists:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...un-endors.html

In April, Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef told WABC radio that "we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will [win] the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance."

The spokesperson for Hamas, terrorists, "like"s Obama? Why is that? Well, here's some info:

http://www.muslimsforobama08.com/

http://bsimmons.wordpress.com/2008/0...ims-for-obama/

On the Muslim Americans for Obama ’08 site, one will find a list of upcoming events, issues and solutions, details on how to join, a links section to sites of interest, and of course, a link to the blog. There’s even a toll-free number to call for more information.


Within the events section, a number of the listings pertain to conferences and conventions being sponsored by organizations that have a number of troubling ties.



One is the 44th Annual ISNA National Convention, held in Rosemont, Illinois.
ISNA or the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) was recently named an “Unindicted Co-conspirator” for a Dallas trial that dealt with the funding of millions of dollars to Hamas. Beginning in December 2003, ISNA was the subject of a Senate investigation into the financing of terror groups overseas. The group currently uses its website to propagate violent hatred against Jews and Christians.


Another of the events listed is the 32nd ICNA-MAS Convention, held in Hartford, Connecticut. ICNA or the Islamic Circle of North America, in August 2006, was the top donor to a Pakistani charity that, at the time, had given $99,000 to the head of Hamas, Khaled Mashaal. Four people associated with the ICNA-related ‘Houston Taliban’ were arrested and charged with jihad training with firearms, for the purpose of joining the Taliban to attack Americans overseas.


MAS or the Muslim American Society, like ISNA, uses the web to spread violent hatred against non-Muslims. In April 2004, MAS’s Communications Director, Randall Todd “Ismail” Royer, was sentenced to 20 years in prison for his activities within the ‘Virginia Jihad Network,’ a group that was conspiring with Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT) to attack Americans and Indians abroad.


Yet another event listing is the 2007 MANA National Convention, held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. MANA or the Muslim Alliance in North America was founded in May of 2000, in response to the arrest of cop killer H. Rap Brown, a.k.a. Jamil Al-Amin. The President (Amir) of the organization is Siraj Wahhaj, an individual that was named by the U.S. government an “Unindicted Co-conspirator” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.


According to Muslim Americans for Obama ’08, it took part in “VOTER REGISTRATION/INFORMATION BOOTHS,” at each of the above venues. Taking that into consideration, since Muslim Americans for Obama ’08 is officially part of the Barack Obama for President team – or as the campaign puts it, “Community” – one can conclude that Senator Obama and/or his campaign had sanctioned its attendance at these events.


Further troubling are the following “Issues & Solutions” on the site:

• Institute a Law to allow Muslim Employees to take an hour off from work for Friday Jummah Prayer.
• Make the 2 Eid’s recognized National Holidays on Calendars with days off from work.
• Provide prayer areas suitable for Salah and Jummah, in public and private facilities. (i.e. Malls, Airports, Universities and government buildings.)

Found on the right side of the website’s homepage are a series of links, most of which deal with information about Senator Obama and the campaign. One of them, though, is a link to Aswat Al-Islam, a radical Islamic multimedia outlet. Muslim Americans for Obama ’08 lists it as “Quran (Audio) English Translation.”


Aswat Al-Islam features the works of such Islamist luminaries as: “Uninidicted Co-conspirators” of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Siraj Wahhaj and Bilal Philips; anti-Christian bigot, Ahmed Deedat; pro-wife beating author, Jamal Badawi; suicide bombing supporter, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi; and the chief cleric of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, who has called for the murders of Jews, Christians and Americans and has described Jews as “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the killers of prophets, and the grandsons of monkeys and pigs,” Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais.
According to Muslim Americans for Obama ’08, Senator Barack Obama “is the BEST candidate for the job in 2008.” But being the best candidate should have as a requisite keeping company that is worthy of respect. Recently, Obama has been cited for having a racist and anti-Israel pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and a campaign advisor that has expressed sympathy for Hamas and Hezbollah, Robert Malley.

If Sen. Obama truly is worthy of the presidency of the United States, he should publicly distance himself from these extremist groups and individuals. And if he does not want his campaign to be seen as hospitable to radical voices, he should sever his ties with the blog that provides credible evidence for this charge.

[Aplomb]

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=2325

There is some good info in a guide form at that link on communist things relating with dates and names included.

[Beetle]

Thanks Aplomb!

I appreciate it!

[Beetle]

Brain,

That is funny. I know what you mean. I moved behind enemy lines. Lots of folks 'round here like Hussien. It is hard to talk to stupit people, but I am working on them. I expect nothing, in hopes the results surprise me.

[Aplomb]

Now here's some great journalism: sarcasm void of refutation, but did you expect anything better...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...203905_pf.html

Obama as You've Never Known Him!
By Dana Milbank
Friday, May 23, 2008; A03

Here are some things we can look forward to learning about Barack Obama:


· That he was mentored in high school by a member of the Soviet-controlled Communist Party.
· That he launched his Illinois state Senate campaign in the home of a terrorist and a killer.
· That while serving as a state senator, he was a member of a socialist front group.
· That his affiliations are so dodgy that he would have trouble getting a government security clearance.
· That there is reason to doubt his "loyalty to the United States."


These and many other implausible accusations were offered by a group of conservatives yesterday -- including a living relic from the House Committee on Un-American Activities -- in a Capitol Hill basement. The charges ranged from the absurd to the merely questionable, but anybody who watched the Swift Boat campaign of 2004 make John Kerry look like a war criminal knows that's not the point.


The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy took a blow with Hillary Clinton's collapse. But it is regrouping, and finding plenty of sinister things to say about Obama -- even if he didn't trade cattle futures.


The group, assembled by something called America's Survival Inc., gathered in the basement of Ebenezer Coffee House at Second and F streets NE. They shared the stage with a big drum set, and posters documenting items they would seek to tie to Obama: an SDS newsletter from 1969 (when he was 7), and a police killing from 1970 (when he was 8).


"We believe that any public figure with links to foreign and hostile interests should be asked to explain those associations," the organizer, Cliff Kincaid, told about two dozen conservatives and a few reporters. "In the case of Obama, a relatively new figure on the national scene, we submit the facts suggest that he would have serious difficulty getting a security clearance in the United States government. An FBI background check was once used to examine one's character, loyalty to the United States, and associations."


"He's a member of an organization [that is] openly a front for two socialist groups," reported another participant, Trevor Loudon.


"Obama was raised and educated in a very Marxist-rich environment, which often would limit his worldview," reported a third, Max Friedman.


But the star of the show was the ancient Herbert Romerstein, who once plied his trade for the Un-American Activities committee. "We decided to start going back and seeing what things influenced him even before he was born," Romerstein announced without a trace of irony, before tying Obama to the Communist Party of the 1930s in Hawaii and Soviet spies on the island. "This is the atmosphere that young Barack Obama grew up in."


The smoking gun? Obama's "mentor" during his teens, according to Kincaid, was "a key member of a Soviet-controlled network that was sponsored by Moscow and active in Hawaii."


These accusations fall somewhere between guilt by association and guilt by invention, but the accusers were just getting started.


In college, Obama "admits selecting Marxist professors among his friends and attending socialist conferences," Kincaid went on. In Chicago, he said, "Obama launched his political career back in 1995 at the home of communist-terrorist Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn," the two Weather Underground figures who have already made a cameo in the campaign. Kincaid then made the unilateral decision to accuse Dohrn of the 1970 killing of a policeman, a charge no prosecutor has made.


"The Weather Underground terrorists," Romerstein added, "were instrumental in getting him to office in the first place."


Those charges were relatively benign compared with the questions. One inquired about the link between "the American left and Islamofascists." Another asked about nefarious influences on Michelle Obama. A third raised the possibility that Obama's "change" slogan is based on the 1961 communist "Movement for Change."


"It's clear that the communists and the socialists are backing him," Kincaid confirmed.
The questions continued: "The Obama-Muslim connection . . . the background of Michelle Obama . . . How he gave $23,000 to this church . . . Was it connected with Tony Rezko . . . the results from Gary, Indiana, which were so late in being released."


It was beginning to sound like a UFO convention. But the panelists took it seriously, firing questions back at the audience. "Was Barack Obama working for Bill Ayers?" Kincaid wondered aloud. Romerstein demanded: "How come for 20 years he sat in the pews and listened to a raving anti-American racist? How did he bring his two young children to this church to hear Wright rave on?"


The evidence was compelling enough for participant Friedman. For him, the Rosetta Stone was Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, who Friedman alleged was the protege of a man with "a Communist Party-front record" in Chicago. "The more I look at this, I'm seeing there are a lot of red-diaper babies around here," he deduced. "By putting these pieces of the puzzle together, I'm beginning to see something much bigger."

[Aplomb]

Perhaps Obama isn't just playing to the audience. Consider this:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/obamas_war.html

une 10, 2008 Obama's War

By Andrew Walden

Those who believe Barack Obama would avoid wars after withdrawing from Iraq are not paying attention. He has laid out a coherent strategy for fighting wars.

After the July, 2007 CNN-You Tube debate, Barack Obama was pilloried for his agreement to "talk without preconditions to leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea."

All of this sounds like typical dove rhetoric. But Obama, in August, 2007 promised to relocate war, not end it.

Islamists in the summer of 2007 were rioting in the streets to bring down Musharraf. Pakistan's corrupt democrats demanded a snout in the trough. Obama chose that moment to undermine Musharraf by pledging military raids into nuclear-armed Pakistan saying, "President Musharraf won't act, we will." Obama promised to get US forces "...out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Speaking Memorial Day weekend at Wesleyan University commencement, Democrat Presidential candidate Sen.Barack Obama (D-IL) told graduates: "At a time of war, we need you to work for peace."

Just prior to the Iowa caucuses, Obama told the Caucus for Priorities:

"I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning -- and as president, I will end it. Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems, and I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending. Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material, and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals."

This also sounds like typical dove rhetoric. But Obama isn't anti-war and his policies are not restricted to the Middle East.

Obama may already be working with Hugo Chavez and the narco-war against Colombia. Columbian troops March 1 nailed narco-guerilla leader Raul Reyes just across the border in Ecuador. In response, Chavez threatened to invade Columbia. Information on a laptop computer found with Reyes' corpse detailed the FARC guerillas'relations with both Venezuela and Ecuador and included a February 28 letter from Reyes to the FARC Secretariat. The letter details extensive FARC relations with the governments of Colombia and Ecuador and includes this item:

"The gringos called for a meeting with the minister to ask him to tell us they are interested in talking about several topics. They claim they new president in their country will be Obama and that these people are interested in their fellow citizens. Obama will support neither Plan Colombia nor the signature of the Free Trade Agreement. In this regard, we replied we are interested in relations with the governments that are on equal grounds and that in the case of the United States, a public statement voicing their interest in talking to the FARC is needed, given their eternal war against us."

As Reyes predicted, on April 10 Democrats in Congress blocked enactment of a free trade treaty with Colombia -- in spite of the fact that Colombian exports are already allowed into the US without tariffs. Obama opposed the treaty, winning denunciation by Colombian president Uribe.

Defending his pledge to meet with foreign enemies without precondition, Obama in mid-May cited the 1961 Kennedy-Khrushchev summit. The Oregonian called Obama's remarks "confusion ". The Washington Times and Hillary Clinton spoke of Obama's "naïveté". Neither is correct. Obama knows exactly what he is doing.

Obama's intention is best understood by analyzing the effect of his proposals -- explained by the New York Times May 22:

"...Kennedy's one presidential meeting with Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet premier, suggests that there are legitimate reasons to fear negotiating with one's adversaries. Although Kennedy was keenly aware of some of the risks of such meetings - his Harvard thesis was titled ‘Appeasement at Munich' - he embarked on a summit meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961, a move that would be recorded as one of the more self-destructive American actions of the cold war, and one that contributed to the most dangerous crisis of the nuclear age.

"...Only a few minutes after parting with Khrushchev, Kennedy, a World War II veteran, told James Reston of The New York Times that the summit meeting had been the ‘roughest thing in my life.' Kennedy went on: ‘He just beat the hell out of me. I've got a terrible problem if he thinks I'm inexperienced and have no guts. Until we remove those ideas we won't get anywhere with him.'

"A little more than two months later, Khrushchev gave the go-ahead to begin erecting what would become the Berlin Wall.... The following spring, Khrushchev made plans to ‘throw a hedgehog at Uncle Sam's pants': nuclear missiles in Cuba. And while there were many factors that led to the missile crisis, it is no exaggeration to say that the impression Khrushchev formed at Vienna - of Kennedy as ineffective - was among them."

Why would Obama want to model his foreign policy on "one of the more self-destructive American actions of the cold war?" Maybe Kennedy's error becomes Obama's plan precisely because it was destructive to America.

Farfetched? Applying foreign force is a completely logical course of action if Obama believes that America's greatest enemies are internal -- and in the majority.

Obama in 2008 says that because of President Bush, "America is not safer since 9/11." Obama's conclusion echoed from the pages of the Boston Globe which celebrated September 11, 2006 by announcing:

"... in the long run, the reaction of the Bush administration may prove more harmful to the national interest than even these horrific attacks."

This is little different than Michael Moore's 2004 conclusion, expressed at the apex of Fahrenheit 911 by a character who appears, utters one line, "Bush is worse than bin-Laden" -- and then vanishes.

While making his movie, Moore issued an April 14, 2004 statement:

"The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents' or ‘terrorists' or ‘The Enemy.' They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win. ...the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end."

Speaking before the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars August 1, 2007 Obama said:

"After 9/11, our calling was to devise new strategies and build new alliances, to secure our homeland and safeguard our values, and to serve a just cause abroad. Just because the President misrepresents our enemies does not mean we do not have them. When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won."

Obama's "war that has to be won" might be against those who Obama believes pose the greatest danger to America: George Bush and the 51% of the electorate who backed him.

Obama explains what new alliances might mean:

"As President, I will lead this effort. In the first 100 days of my Administration, I will travel to a major Islamic forum and deliver an address to redefine our struggle. I will make clear that we are not at war with Islam, that we will stand with those who are willing to stand up for their future, and that we need their effort to defeat the prophets of hate and violence."

As with most of Obama's rhetoric there is a double meaning. The general public might assume "prophets of hate and violence" refers to al-Qaeda and other Islamist terrorists and "those who are willing to stand up for their future" refers to brave reformers in Muslim countries. But Bush hater rhetoric for years has painted President Bush and those who follow him as "the prophets of hate and violence".

Margaret Kimberly of the Black Agenda Report May 31, 2007 explains:

"The terror attack that took place on September 11, 2001 was an aberration in more ways than one. Muslims were the perpetrators, but that is usually not the case. The purveyors of hate and violence in America are almost always Christians."

Obama has numerous well-documented associations with the left in academia and at his suddenly abandoned Trinity United Church of Christ. One must presume that the double meaning is not lost on anyone who spent 20 years listening to Rev Jeremiah Wright and working with Weatherman bomber William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

Obama's own writings point to his hostility to Americans identified with the Bush electorate. Bill Sammon writing January 29, 2007 in the Washington Examiner points out excerpts from Obama's book "Dreams from my Father" praising Islam and denouncing Christianity:

"Malcolm X's autobiography seemed to offer something different. His repeated acts of self-creation spoke to me; the blunt poetry of his words, his unadorned insistence on respect, promised a new and uncompromising order, martial in its discipline, forged through sheer force of will."

"Malcolm's discovery toward the end of his life, that some whites might live beside him as brothers in Islam, seemed to offer some hope of eventual reconciliation."

"The person who made me proudest of all was (my brother) Roy. Actually, now we call him Abongo, his Luo name, for two years ago he decided to reassert his African heritage. He converted to Islam, and has sworn off pork and tobacco and alcohol."

Sammon continues:

Meanwhile, Obama remained sharply critical of what he called 'the religious absolutism of the Christian right." . . .

In "Audacity," the senator wrote that such believers insist "not only that Christianity is America's dominant faith, but that a particular, fundamentalist brand of that faith should drive public policy, overriding any alternative source of understanding, whether the writings of liberal theologians, the findings of the National Academy of Sciences, or the words of Thomas Jefferson."

As for the Democratic Party, Obama observed that "a core segment of our constituency remains stubbornly secular in orientation, and fears - rightly, no doubt - that the agenda of an assertively Christian nation may not make room for them or their life choices."

Although the overwhelming majority of Americans describe themselves as Christians, Obama does not believe that any one religion should define the United States.

"We are no longer just a Christian nation," he argues in "Audacity," which was published last year. "We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers."

Obama calls the Iraq war "a botched and ill-advised U.S. military incursion into a Muslim country." He is also protective of civil rights for Muslims in the U.S.

"In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans ... have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging," he laments. "I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

What would Obama's war look like?

At the July 23, 2007CNN-You Tube debate Obama told the audience:

"...One of the first things that I would do ... is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they are going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses. They have been acting irresponsibility up until this point. But if we tell them we are not going to be a permanent occupying force we are in a position to say that they are going to have to carry some weight in terms of stabilizing the region."

But handing Iraq over to Iran and Syria is not the end of Obama's war plan-it is the beginning. After giving the enemy a chance to regroup, Obama would send our troops right back in. Speaking at a Democrat debate at Cleveland State University, Feb 26, 2008, Obama explained:

"As commander in chief, I will always reserve the right to make sure that we are looking out for American interests. And if al-Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad."

Before going back in, Obama would add lots of raw recruits. As he explained before the Chicago Council on Global Affairs April 23, 2007:

"...I strongly support the expansion of our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines."

Then he would create incentives for the most experienced personnel to leave the service. Investors Business Daily May 15, 2008 explained the effect of a GI Bill favored by Obama:

"According to the Defense Department, the program's short three-year service requirement for full benefits would cause servicemen and women to leave the armed forces too soon at a time when they are vitally needed."

Obama's apparent strategy: While acting to destabilize nuclear Pakistan, America withdraws from Iraq and disarms its army's most powerful weaponry. Then America sends an army of raw recruits stripped of its most experienced personnel back into an Iraq to once again fight a reinvigorated al-Qaeda, which would have taken control after Obama's withdrawal placed Iraq under the tutelage of Syria and nuclear Iran. That is calculated, not naïve.

As Michael Moore explained:

"...the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let...."

[American Patriot]

I think this poll is "fixed".

ROTFLMAO!

[Beetle]

I used the media technique to phrase the question!!

[American Patriot]

AH! Well, it's obviously legitimate then... since you know, they are usually "right" aren't they? LOL!

[Ryan Ruck]

I used the media technique to phrase the question!!

Good show... Good show...

*golf clap*

[Beetle]

If its good enough for the media, well then, it, it, it just aint good enough for me!

:-)

[Brian Baldwin]

Actually I don't see how it's fixed... They're either stupid or commies... I mean the only other thing you could suggest is that they're right. ROTFLMAO We all know that the dems being right is like the whole Nobel Peace Prize for Al Gore. Just wouldn't make sense.

[Ryan Ruck]

Barack Obama Ran On A Marxist Party Line In 1996

It seems that Senator Obama's Old party was called the New Party. The party was a Marxist Political coalition. This was not a guilt by association thing. Senator Obama sought out their nomination. He was successful in obtaining that endorsement, and he used a number of New Party volunteers as campaign workers. Read more on the Marxist endorsement that Barack Obama sought out:

Co-founded in 1992 by Daniel Cantor (a former staffer for Jesse Jackson's 1988 presidential campaign) and Joel Rogers (a sociology and law professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison), the New Party was a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to endorse and elect leftist public officials -- most often Democrats. The New Party's short-term objective was to move the Democratic Party leftward, thereby setting the stage for the eventual rise of new Marxist third party.

Most New Party members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America and the militant organization ACORN. The party's Chicago chapter also included a large contingent from the Committees of Correspondence, a Marxist coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and Communist Party USA members.

The New Party's modus operandi included the political strategy of "electoral fusion," where it would nominate, for various political offices, candidates from other parties (usually Democrats), thereby enabling each of those candidates to occupy more than one ballot line in the voting booth. By so doing, the New Party often was able to influence candidates' platforms. (Fusion of this type is permitted in seven states -- Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Mississippi, New York, South Carolina, and Vermont -- but is common only in New York.)

Though Illinois was not one of the states that permitted electoral fusion, in 1995 Barack Obama nonetheless sought the New Party's endorsement for his 1996 state senate run. He was successful in obtaining that endorsement, and he used a number of New Party volunteers as campaign workers.

In 1996, three of the four candidates endorsed by the New Party won their electoral primaries. The three victors included Barack Obama (in the 13th State Senate District), Danny Davis (in the 7th Congressional District), and Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in the 7th Subcircuit Court. All four candidates attended an April 11, 1996 New Party membership meeting to express their gratitude for the party's support.

The New Party's various chapters similarly helped to elect dozens of other political candidates in a host of American cities.

One of the more notable New Party members was Carl Davidson, a Chicago-based Marxist who became a political supporter of Barack Obama in the mid-1990s.

In 1997 the New Party's influence declined precipitously after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that electoral fusion was not protected by the First Amendment's freedom of association clause. By 1998 the party was essentially defunct. Daniel Canto and other key party members went on to establish a new organization with similar ideals, the Working Families Party of New York.- Source Discoverthenetworks.org

[Ryan Ruck]

Two interesting PDF files...

Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection

Communism in Hawaii and the Obama Connection

[Brian Baldwin]

last night on Fox News I watched as they showed two democrat politicians from Tennessee suggest Obama may have terrorist connections. One was Davis. Anyone have info on that? If the Dems think it's possible then we have bigger problems than his commie crap.