Tag Archives: Communist

Using the Constitution Series: Speaking with a Communist

in-theory-communism-works_-_red2

Does private property exist? If we own property, may we alter it as we see fit? Recently, while discussing property rights, a whole new argument arose…Communism.

Are individuals able to exercise private property rights or does government control property? The first time I encountered this debate was with a libertarian’s husband who felt because we pay property taxes, we don’t own property. The next time, I believe a liberal, was concerned about what his neighbor’s did, playing loud music, water rights and property values. The last argument claimed that the state owns property and we only pay “rent” in the form of taxes.

The argument transitioned to we do not have alodial title. Perplexed by the angle of the argument, I went home and researched “Alodial titles”. I realized that he was not advocating for property rights but for government control of property. In other words, you do not have control and ownership of your own property. The ability to make decisions based off your own decisions of property in land and servicing one another within business also.

Paying taxes is different than a mortgage, as the bank owns your property, you may not be able to tear down your house because the bank actually owns the property. While paying property taxes, you’re paying local government for the common good such as roads, schools, police, etc. This is based on your property value. While apartment complexes and communities pay taxes, some communities enter into a home owners association which is different than your local government. Your local government is not a home owners association.

Our constitutional republic predates Marxism, communism and fascist theories and our founder’s understood the importance of private property. Communism is defined as, “advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.” As government does identify property lines and other similar functions, they are making law concerning property rights so advocates for communism use this as a springboard into control of property. This is a far cry from control over your property.

Private property and capitalism are a cornerstone of our nation for over 225 years, this is a right protected by the Fifth Amendment. It reads, “…nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

…the right to life issue is a whole new discussion.

For private property to be taken, it must exist. Now, there are some who claim that the Bill of Rights only applies to the federal government but communism is communism. Whether it’s a local, state or federal level, property is still taken. Taxing authority is different than owning property; taxes go to paying for common interests.

Private property rights are the most important of our freedoms. People cannot exercise their rights and freedoms without private property…or if they do, it will be with the permission of the property owners.

The ability to redress grievances and exercise the Five Freedoms, freedom of assembly, speech, press, religion or petition cannot be exercised without private property. When a person posts on Facebook, they are using someone else’s property to exercise their freedom of press. When you speak at a city council or public grounds, you are speaking on government property and should abide by their rules.

If government owns your property, then they may conduct “Illegal searches and seizures.” Do you have the right to bear arms if you’re renting your property? When someone invites you to use their property, it is their option to allow you to represent their property as they see fit.

When government owns all property, this economic system is communism. Those with a silver tongue will always advocate for communism over capitalism because their commodity is politics and the art of persuasion. The foundation of our economic system is capitalism. The most vulnerable within our society is…the individual! …and protecting private property rights should be sacrosanct! Without private property and respect for it …then no one is free.

…besides, the “supreme Law of the Land” protects it.

“I would have saved 1,000 slaves if they knew they were slaves.” – Harriet Tubman

Kabuki Theater: Is the GOP “Controlled Opposition”?

kabuki

kabuki

During the entire torturous game of shadow puppets that the Republican Party and the Democrat Party played in the run-up to the disastrous fiscal cliff deal, every single conservative knew how it would play out. The president would make some outrageous demands, pretend to compromise, and get basically everything he wanted from an effectively complicit Republican Party.

This play has been run so many times in Washington the last few decades, from George H.W. Bush onward, that one has to wonder if there is any actual opposition in either party or in the mainstream media to America’s obvious lurch towards a socialist police state.

It begs the question: Is the Republican Party a legitimate opposition party? Or has the GOP been captured by socialists and is being used to promote their agenda? Seems like a bit too Robert Zemeckis for most Americans to buy, unless one can get past the slick interchange of left-wing terms like “socialism,” “progressivism,” and “liberalism.”

But why can’t it happen here? Nations all over the world have been captured by socialists: Russia, Serbia, Poland, Hungary, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, North Korea, Ethiopia, Venezuela, Cuba, Greece, Spain, Britain, and France — that’s just to name a few of the more obvious examples. It’s not to say the severity of socialism is the same: just like with diseases, peoples have varying immune responses, resistance, and coping mechanisms for dealing with the communist disorder.

America is pretty far along in its descent into collectivism. Thirty years ago, one could have said the same thing. But the Cold War kept Americans’ resistance high. Perhaps when the U.S.S.R. formally disbanded, leaving in place many of the same faces from its KGB apparatus, and the cause of radical environmentalism mysteriously appeared from out of nowhere on the UN stage, people began to lower their defenses.

The proof of the left’s effectiveness can be shown by the last few elections. President Obama has a well-explored socialist past, including but not limited to proven affiliation with the socialist New Party in Illinois. The president never had a noticeable public “coming out party,” when he rejected socialism and embraced the U.S.’ system of Constitutional government (on the contrary). Occasionally, President Obama mouths the words ‘free enterprise,’ but these empty words have no bearing whatsoever on his actions.

Yet the mainstream media, let alone the Republican Party, rarely if ever mention the president’s radical leftist associations and tendencies. Speculatively, one must consider the possibility that the GOP is being used as a willing scapegoat in a socialist ruse called “controlled opposition.”

Alternatively, another way of putting it is that there are a significant number of members of the Republican Party who pretend to be on board with Constitutional government and free economy, but who are actually leftists or so-called “progressives.” They knowingly lie about their ideological loyalties, and then vote against liberty on key issues — whether on national security items or social welfare spending. From a theoretical standpoint, the problem is thus both ideological and practical.

In order to understand the argument that the Republican Party could essentially be “captured” by socialists (whether through ideological or operative influence), a bit of background information is needed. Below is an excerpt from Theodore Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist.” The entry of 45 Current Communist Goals into the 1963 Congressional record by Representative Herlong, Jr. of Florida can be found here.

Below lists some of the major entries:

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis. (See recent article, “Professor calls for abolition of Constitution.”)

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture — education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“united force”] to solve economic, political or social problems.

If the Congressional record isn’t enough of a trustworthy source, one could go right to a primary document — the Communist Manifesto. Anyone with a critical mind can see most of the planks from the manifesto have been implemented with a stunning degree of success. But let’s address specifically the socialist tactic of “controlled opposition.”

Socialist regimes struggling to maintain legitimacy sometimes use the fake appearance of democracy and choice, as KGB defector Anatoly Golitsyn explains in New Lies for Old and The Perestroika Deception. This theory actually explains the behavior of Republicans much better than the alternative hypothesis that the GOP actually cares about this country and its Constitution or the null hypothesis that the Republican Party is not controlled by socialists.

When Republican politicians like Governor Chris Christie hyperventilate about a bloated Superstorm Sandy relief bill, bemoaning that Republicans don’t care about those suffering in his state, that is a perfectly socialist thing to say. When Peter King goes on CNN and sobs about this porked-up $60 billion spending bill being held up by House Republicans, and he argues like it is assumed that politicians should be visiting states like New York to buy off voters, that is also a perfectly socialist thing to say. When King slams the GOP, sabotaging its role as an opposition party from within, one that presumably disagrees with runaway spending of taxpayers’ money, again — this is all too predictable from a socialist orchestration standpoint.

The question becomes: How would lying socialists act any different?

There is the alternative explanation that these politicians are ideologically subverted and are simply unable to understand what role they are playing in this left-wing charade. Personally, this is hard to believe, because it’s all so obvious and calculated for those who know anything about socialism and communism. Witness the thousands of East European, Russian, and Cuban emigres screaming about the socialist tendencies of the Democrat Party and the new tone of American politics.

Unfortunately, there are really hardly any contradictions to the theory that the Republicans are unopposed to socialism. What would it really take for a majority of representatives in the Congress to oppose the obvious maneuver to bankrupt the country and put the infrastructure in place for a communist police state? All it takes are votes, and yet we all wring our hands as if it would be an act of bravado akin to Mission Impossible.

Government never gets reduced in size, and the budget hardly ever get seriously cut, regardless of the public outcry or danger to the public finances. Yes, politicians may be cowards, but they are also not idiots. They have children and grandchildren too, and they must assume that it is better to be in the government, than out of it.

Thus, several prominent Republicans revolting would be consistent at this Destabilization stage in what KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov called the Demoralization-Destabilization-Crisis-Normalization paradigm of communist subversion. It would be textbook salami tactics from the party infiltrators.

Those who observe Russian politics understand that there are foil parties — ultra-nationalist and communist parties that play a role in making the regime seem reasonable —  as well as fake political opposition candidates who are actually lapdogs of the Kremlin. The last election that brought back former KGB Colonel Vladimir Putin into formal power from his position of de facto power is an excellent case-in-point. Billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov appeared out of nowhere to run against Putin, right in the midst or roiling protests precisely against the stage-managed farce of Russian “democracy.” (Interestingly enough, it appears that the Obama campaign even borrowed its ‘first vote’ deflower power idea from some of Putin’s more amorous ads.)

On the ideological side of the equation, the left-right dichotomy is thoroughly corrupt, as it is framed and reinforced by corporate-run mainstream media. Corporations, for the record, are not necessarily supporters of “capitalism,” as demonstrated by the bailout and stimulus spending debacles. But no longer is the fight in the main public forum between left-wing statists and Constitution-supporting freedom fighters; but rather it is between fighters for the police state on one hand, and fighters for the welfare state on the other.

It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out that this deadly dance ultimately leads to a totalitarian basketcase; after both parties get through trading quid pro quo votes in fake opposition kabuki theater, the result is a massive Department of Homeland Security under the sole authority of the executive branch and a media clamoring for gun confiscation at the first sight of any inevitable mass murder or other horrific gun crime.

The two parties are blending together in an act the communists called “convergence” — which is a mind-trick that normalizes the psychological perception of behavior through false dichotomies and calculated dialectics. This incremental tactic pushes the hard left narrative ever more into the mainstream of political awareness, due to the exclusion of rational, conservative alternatives.

The university education system, for example, plays a role in this process by censoring pro-market or pro-Constitutional materials out of syllabi and class discussions. The debate is framed between the hard left and the soft left, as if those perspectives are the only two alternatives. Political correctness and intimidation guides the conversation ever more to the hard left, specifically through the use of rhetorical tactics like the Delphi Technique.

This “convergence” is also the grand strategy for (former) communist states like China and former avowedly communist states like present day former KGB-run Russia. While these states introduce cosmetic market and democratic reforms, they remove the perception of threat that comes from communist infiltration and subversion (not that these states have to do much of anything nowadays to feed this — their guy is already in place). Communism becomes an archaic concern; it is removed from visibility, and repackaged under the guise of UN-led initiatives like radical environmentalism. Pivoting from staunch Cold War foe to mutual allies in forming an unaccountable world government takes “flexibility,” which could only come from a “reset” of relations.

When one examines the United Nations, and researches who formed the body, one finds that known socialists like Lauchlin Currie, Edouard Daladier, and Vyacheslav Molotov were instrumental in the mission. With Keynesianism being institutionalized at Bretton Woods, a slow war of attrition against capitalism was ensured, using the Federal Reserve (a plank right out of the Communist Manifesto) as a transmission belt to stretch the dollar to its breaking point, meanwhile eroding property rights and other aspects of free economy.

It is such the case that the federal government effectively owns the monetary system, owns “capital,” and thus, owns “capitalism.” We are all basically slaves to this ignoble machine. The government is micro-managing the economy into foreseeable and avoidable disaster.

Conclusively, numerous politicians in both parties are pushing America towards socialism on purpose. Where is the outcry from the Republican Party? Where is the outrage at the spending? What about the police state and our rights? If these politicians actually felt something must be said or done, they would find a way to make it happen. Instead, most Republicans are silent as church mouses, folding their hands or rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

One has to hand it to the leftists — their sick, twisted plan has come off brilliantly. There are so many ignoramuses and “half-baked intellectuals” out there who are unmoved by any appeal to rational self-interest, that it doesn’t matter what kind of arguments you hit them with, they won’t ‘get it’ until a black boot kicks them in their fat bottoms.

Can We Trade Obama For Putin?

Who knew, after the past four years of calling Obama a Socialist, it turns out we were wrong, it is now confirmed, he is a Communist. I guess we all owe Obama an apology, only calling him a Socialist for four years when he was a Communist must have been a big hit to his ego. But now the truth is out and I think we all should apologize to Obama for calling him a mere Socialist, after all being a Communist is one step up from being a Socialist. Let’s not forget all his supporters that were screaming “Obama is not a Socialist” for the past four years, they deserve an apology as well, after all it turns out they were not lying to us.

It seems that the Russian newspaper Pravda, which was formed as the official Communist publication of the former Soviet Union, came out with a story the other day claiming that Obama is without a doubt a Communist, after all, who would know a Communist better than Russia?

The author, Xavier Lerma, goes on to say how Obama’s “cult of personality” has mesmerized the ignorant in America, who will follow the hope and change icon in much the same way as ”fools” still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia, “Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.” Now I think at this point I deserve an apology from all the Liberals who have been calling me a racist and a bigot for calling the followers of Obama idiots over the past four years, seems I was right for calling them ignorant idiots all along.

Mr. Lerma went on to say that even President Vladimir Putin was more of a capitalist than Obama. Listen to what Putin said recently, “During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.” Putin also speaks and promotes smaller government and less taxes.

Now, my question is this, if a Communist says that he has learned his lesson, that Communism does not work, what the hell is wrong with Obama, why is he trying to take us down the same path that collapsed the Soviet Union? Many people, including myself have said that was Obama’s plan all along that he wanted to end the American way of life, now we know he just might do it.

Mr. Lerma also noticed some other similarities with the former Soviet Union and America.  “Christianity in the U.S. is under attack as it was during the early period of the Soviet Union when religious symbols were against the law,” We see everyday attacks on Christianity, The ACLU and other atheist groups in America are on the attack against religious symbols. Lawsuits against religious freedom and expression seem to be an everyday occurrence.

For years, I have been watching videos on YouTube with people who fled Communist countries and came to America for freedom, but noticed that America was starting to resemble the countries that they fled. Now we have a former Communist, telling us that we are headed in the wrong direction, when are the American people going to wake-up, when we have a hammer and cycle on our flag?

Is there a reason why the former Soviet Union is now becoming more like America used to be? Of course there is, because the America of yesteryear worked and Communism does not, is that so hard to understand? I guess it must be, because America has chosen a President who wants to take us down a road that will surely fail. But many of us in America knew what his intentions were all along, the rest were Kool-Aid drinkers. I only wish Pravda had published that piece a week before the election, maybe more people would have woken up.

 

This is one man’s opinion.

President Obama is NOT a Socialist!

obamahiel

In two speeches last week in Colorado President Obama revealed his true ideology, and it is not Socialism. While defending the automaker bailouts, he demonstrated his vision while calling for similar bailouts for all industries.

In this one speech he confirms what many have long thought, Obama’s philosophy is closer to Mussolini than Marx, one of Fascism or National Socialism rather than Communism or Socialism.

The Affordable Care Act has effectively given him control, not only of the insurance industry, but the health care industry as well. In addition there is a provision in the bill (Sec. 2717, Subsection D, paragraph b,) which gives him control over all of us.

Compare his statement in Colorado with this one. “Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merge of state and corporate power.” -Benito Mussolini

And with this one, “State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management.” -Benito Mussolini

And this one, “The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporate, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their respective associations, circulate within the State.” -Benito Mussolini

Mussolini also said, “The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. […] They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results.”

A section of National Defense Authorization Act, signed by President Barack Obama in December, could give the Federal government legal powers to detain any dissident voices if they are deemed to be enemies of the state.

In 2008, in a campaign speech in Colorado Obama called for a “private army, just as powerful, trained and well funded as the military.”

Today, he is busily de-funding the US military while labor unions are being exempted from stalking laws and other laws pertaining to the use of violence in their cause.

Consider this description of Mussolini’s reign in 1930’s Italy from the Constitutional Rights Foundation, Mussolini and the Rise of Fascism.

During the 1930s, Mussolini organized industry, agriculture, and economic services into state-controlled labor unions and employer associations called “corporations.” Government officials appointed the heads of each union and employer corporation. They negotiated wages and working conditions with each other.

This “third way” corporatism attempted to unify workers and employers by requiring them to set aside their private interests in favor of the best interests of the fascist state. In practice, however, the employers usually benefited more than the workers did.

Police crackdowns on dissent were mild compared to fascism in Hitler’s Germany. But a special court tried anti-fascists, those working against Mussolini’s regime.

Again, if we look at the way General Motors was re-organized, with the labor union in control and a large share of stock owned by the federal government, it parallels Mussolini’s “third way”. Now President Obama wants to re-organize the rest of industry in the same manner by his own admission!

Also notice how President Obama has sought to organize existing labor unions like the UAW, SEIU, and the NEA into a private army behind him while at the same time punishing non-union businesses like Gibson Guitar and right to work states like South Carolina.

While not blatantly anti-semetic, his treatment of Benjamin Netanyahu has been far less than friendly, and his “off mike” comment to Nicolas Sarkozy was telling. More troubling though is the recent DHS report labeling groups who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty, and believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty,” as possible terrorists.

This administration and it’s support groups spend an inordinate amount of time trying to demonize certain other groups of people based on their political philosophy, religion, and color of their skin. The continuing persecution, though not nearly as ferocious, is akin to the demonization of people of Jewish extraction in 1930’s Germany.
Marx believed that the workers should unite and takeover the means of production, that the fruits of that production would then be shared among the workers according to their needs. Fascism on the other hand, believes that the government, in partnership with corporations, should run the nation, and that the people must live their lives for the greater good of the country, rather than the pursuit of happiness for themselves.

Whatever the guiding philosophy, time and time again the administration has shown an utter disregard for the constitution and the rule of law, preferring to govern by edict rather than the consent of the governed. Without the re-election restraints placed on him in a second term, there is no telling how dictatorial he may become.

Why Obama Could Be a Socialist Subverter

obama-pledge1

Revelations regarding the fact that the current president Barack Obama was a member of the socialist New Party, which has affiliations with the Democratic Socialists of America, have raised the possibility that he was specifically groomed to be a subversive by his mentors and associates throughout his life and political career.

Many are psychologically invested in maintaining their mythological belief structure about Barack Obama: that he is a political moderate and the right are going mad (probably because he is black); that it is “racist” to call him any negative descriptor, including the term “socialist”… and all manner of ideas inserted in their minds by the complicit mainstream media complex. Such falsely held beliefs betray any understanding of long-standing party conflicts and the historical context of past political debates. It is an utter failure of the education system to teach citizens relevant American civics.

Others cannot believe that conspiracies exist at all. Unhinged speculation about the “truth” about 9/11 (which more than half of Democrats believed) or the undue influence of certain political conferences have tainted the term, making it seem impossible that political and financial elites conspire to undermine our national interest. The polarized political environment also makes it difficult to convert people, even after you hit them with sledge-hammer like facts to chip away the foundations of their worldview.

But the cold, hard “truth” is that after decades of radicalization of the universities, media and courts, we are on a clear trajectory to being bankrupted in the manner of socialist-run Greece. This is an intentional strategy that is in part organized at an international level (through IGOs like the UN and the IMF, which was recently headed by a socialist). Such agenda items as the UN’s Agenda 21 (official website) and the Millennium Challenge (official website) articulate the worldwide organized left’s goals. The degree to which President Obama’s policies coincide with and do not deviate from such agenda items are a proxy measure of his plausible participation in an orchestrated effort to undermine the nation’s sovereignty and to loot and oppress its citizenry.

Conspiracies Exist

Throughout history, conspiracies have taken place that threatened the very life-blood of governments and peoples.  The Catalinarian Conspiracy, taking place in the first century B.C.E., was a very serious plot to overthrow the Roman Republic.  Such a plot prompted the great thinker Cicero to state the following:

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor—he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city—he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared…(42 B.C.E.)

Certainly, one cannot accuse Cicero of being a dotty old fool.  But his statement neither proves or disproves the claim that such a conspiracy exists in the United States. That being said, a prescient mind familiar with neomarxist theory and experience with both the media and academia would be hard-pressed to deny that there is an astonishingly large cohort of intellectuals with no sympathy whatsoever for the American system of Constitutionally limited government.

It should be conceded that a concerted group effort to undermine, destroy, or “fundamentally transform” a legitimately founded government using means of infiltration and deception is by definition a conspiracy, and in this presentation, with the intent to commit high treason.  But what else could one make of the Alinsky doctrine of “boring from within,” or the Gramscian strategy of a “long march” through the institutions of the country, capturing them and using them to move the country in a hard-left direction?

On Proving a Conspiracy

There are numerous conspiracy theories on the Internet regarding all manner of topics. They vary in quality between the provable, the plausible, the unfounded, and the just plain crazy.

What is a conspiracy? The following is a dictionary definition:

con·spir·a·cy

Noun:
  1. A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
  2. The action of plotting or conspiring

In order to decisively judge something as true or false, hard and undeniable evidence is generally required.  But there is also the circumstantial manner of proving a theory, which requires numerous facts that fit very closely a given pattern, with little if no contradictory evidence presented, and very weak alternative hypotheses.

Conspiracies exist.  Not all conspiracies are true.  Subversion is real.  But not everything one disagrees with ideologically is an example of willful subversion. These are a few necessary disclaimers, lest one believe that the following is a one-sided presentation of the facts.  It is.  That is necessary when one has a theory, regardless of what it is.

President Obama may not think of himself as a communist, narrowly defined.  He may not even have any knowledge of being part of a “conspiracy,” and would indeed laugh at the notion. I find the claim that the president is both open about his aims and forthright in his associations hard to believe, but it is not a necessary part of the argument to belabor what Obama thinks or doesn’t think.  Nothing that follows here entails mind-reading – only a willingness to look into the evidence presented and to debunk it point-by-point, or otherwise to formulate a stronger alternative hypothesis, which is substantiated by more than hearsay.

Not everything presented is immediately falsifiable, which is an important part of sound theory.  But when something is held out as merely “plausible,” as opposed to verifiable, it will be openly admitted as such.

The following is not comprehensive, as it is merely a blog post, and not a full-length, explicitly documented book.

A Sketch of the Communist Connection Argument

Here is what I think is the “terrible truth” about Mr. Obama.

Obama is a symbol and was plausibly conceived as such (if one might believe that Obama Sr. targeted Stanley with ulterior motives, a convincing dynamic) between a drifting progressive white woman of questionable judgment and a known Marxist Kenyan living in a Third World country.  The USSR ran ‘active measures’ all over the world; meaning, its intelligence agencies targeted governments for destabilization.  Involved in this process was a long campaign of cultural infiltration and subversion.  Barack’s father may have been targeted by the KGB for an ‘active measure’ to be run against the United States — either in Kenya (helping him to get to Harvard) or afterwards.

Once Obama was born, his background suggests one of ingrained “rootlessness,” which was marked by shifting parental, cultural, religious, and perhaps even sexual contexts.  This background leads to a narcissistic personality complex, where one may believe he is transcendent over his environment and one where the subject forms very weak personal attachments.  When combined with the Alinsky doctrine of using people as a means to an end, we have a political operator of Obama’s genus [sic].

But let’s back up.  The central causal link between Barack Obama and the USSR’s intelligence agencies would most likely be Frank Marshall Davis.  FMD had the verifiable communist party pedigree to be a KGB contact – this is the smoking gun all American patriots should seek out, first and foremost. President Obama effectively concedes that “Frank” is FMD in his ghost-written book “Dreams.”  Obama’s literary skills do not suggest that he was alone writing his biographies (Weather Underground terrorist and now esteemed English professor William Ayers, who lived in Obama’s neighborhood in Chicago, may have had more than a small hand in crafting them.)

Obama’s lived an extremely charmed life, and apparently with no merit to warrant it.  This is partially a reflection of affirmative action practices, but certainly there is enough to suggest more. How did he pay for Harvard? Clues suggest that he was sponsored by Rashid Khalidi, a Saudi agent, using oil money.  How did he become editor of the Harvard Law Review? He certainly left no paper trail to justify it.

Obama’s political life becomes even weirder and grayer once coming to Chicago.  He was a radical community organizer, often working side-by-side with known communists in the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).  There is documented evidence of his membership in the DSA-offshoot New Party, which was also communistic and would use fusion tactics in conjunction with Democrat Party affiliation to win elections in Illinois, until the practice was banned by the courts.

The man had serious hardcore left contacts with world communist backgrounds, like Alice Palmer and Valerie Jarrett, the latter’s father Vernon Davis a card-carrying communist who knew FMD.

But the overarching theme is that Obama’s background is akin to what KGB agents called a “legend” – a contrived biography with just enough murkiness and just enough substance to be a fertile ground for psychological warfare, disinformation tricks, conspiracy-mongering, and the like.  Obama’s symbolic stature as a “unifier” leading America to transcend its (racist) past makes any attack on him an attack on hope and change and unity and on and on.  Only a “racist, bigot, homophobe” would do such a thing; ergo, attacking Obama makes someone a racist, a bigot, and a homophobe.  That’s Critical Theory. That’s the Neomarxist strategy.

Most Americans Will Deny The Plausibility of Such a Theory for Emotional Reasons

Furthermore, although the evidence is overwhelming that Obama is a socialist and plausibly a communist, this is a situation that most Americans refuse emotionally to accept, and one will never be able to prove this sufficiently to some in habitualized denial short of Obama admitting it on live television.  Even then, millions would refuse to believe it.  We have been sold a big lie, and as Hitler understood, that is very hard to debunk with reason and evidence.  People want to believe in what Obama’s saying, and he looks so nice, and speaks so well!  They can’t get past the superficial facade and probe into his past. Obama has a phantom background, and the evidence that must be necessarily cherry-picked for signs of his radicalism, such as his provable associations with the America-damning Jeremiah Wright and the literal flamethrower William Ayers, can always be explained away by something – guilt by association, for example.  Well, how many communists, black liberation theologians, and other radicals does a man have to run with before an observer gets the gist that the man is a communist – especially one who admits he chose his friends carefully?

There are other ways of explaining away examples of communist leftist associations in Obama’s radical past, but the problem is, you can’t explain away it all.  What the substantiable evidence indicates is a “pattern of behavior” that matches his known past.  When you have such a strong overlap in current behavior, current associations, past behavior, past associations, and an accumulated record of statements that suggest to you that someone is who he appears to be; that’s what one should adjudge, until contradicting evidence is presented.  I see no reason to believe that Obama has any feeling for America, its traditions, or its Constitution beyond sheer lip service. Nearly everything in his past and in the present points otherwise.

Obama’s willful conduct domestically and in terms of foreign affairs point to the programmatic unraveling of the strictures of the U.S. Constitution.  His concessionary and disadvantageous actions towards China and Russia in particular are very troubling to say the least. We need to begin looking more earnestly for smoking guns of the president’s associations with communists in his past, in his current administration, and with other known fellow-travelers around the world.

Please see the series 1001 Reasons to Vote Against Barack Obama for piecemeal documentation of Obama’s socialist and communist links. A previous version under this title was originally posted on my blog RogueGovernment, and was reblogged in light of troubling current events involving the president and his policies.

Chavez Lovefest & the Medal of Honor

Never missing an opportunity to praise socialists, President Obama awarded Honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America Dolores Huerta with the Medal of Freedom, traditionally the highest civilian honor bestowed upon American citizens.

Huerta, who works under the direction of Labor Secretary (and open borders advocate) Hilda Solis, has spent a lifetime praising socialists and communists like Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. She pals around with other socialists and communists like Jodie Evans of Code Pink, Van Jones and terrorist Bill Ayers.

Ayers is significant in the love affair with Hugo Chavez in many ways.  For one, Ayers spoke at the World Economic Forum in Caracas in 2006 and praised Chavez for the Bolivarian revolution claiming that Venezuela was leading the world to “fundamental change” in education. Remember, it was in Bill Ayers’ living room that Barack Obama got his political start.

New Medal of Freedom recipient Dolores Heurta seems to have quite the affinity for President Chavez as seen in a video here at the Blaze.com.

Chavez, a self-proclaimed socialist well on his way to communism, has been writing the playbook for the Obama administration by expropriating private business and industries like food and energy production.  Shortly after Chavez forced privately owned Minneapolis-based Cargill to turn over its rice mill to the Venezuelan government, GM  and Chrysler fell victim to the same fate in America.  Chavez has also taken control of other private businesses like Hilton Hotels, steel production and the banking industry.

Huerta has made a lifelong career of forcing union demands on American companies and taxpayers.  She is co-founder of the United Farm Workers’ Union, has worked with AFL-CIO and has led protests, walkouts and boycotts on American industries.

Hugo Chavez must be proud to know her.  In 2009, Chavez took a page out of Huerta’s playbook and told oil industry workers in Venezuela that if they refuse to join the state-run unions they would be fired from their jobs.

It seems socialists all have the same agenda, control everything and tell the people it’s for their own good.  Now that’s freedom for ya.

FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER! www.twitter.com/erinhaust

Obama’s Favorite Congressman Hangs Out With, Gets Award From Communists




Wow! To paraphrase a 50s disc jockey on a Top 40 rock radio station I used to listen to, “The hits just keep on coming.”

Have you ever heard of Representative Danny K. Davis? He is, among other things, a Democrat from Chicago, IL, sits on the House Committee for Homeland Security, is a New Party member (as is Obama, look about half way down this site’s page), and is aligned with the communist party. A communist on the Homeland Security Committee. Will the ironies never cease?

So what, you say. Davis recently received an accolade from none other than President Barack Hussein Obama for being “One of the Best Congressmen in the Country.” He received the People’s World “Chris Hani and Rudy Lozano Social Justice Award.” And Davis is Obama’s favorite congressman. Davis is one of the best congressmen in the country, Obama said at a 2004 Teamsters Union meeting, “because he shares our values.” Here is much more information about the “New Party and its connection to Obama. Be sure to look about halfway down the page of this source. And, all you Obama/liberal/progressive/Democrat Kool-Aid drinkers will want to watch this video.

Again, so what? Obama was just being nice to Davis. Well, in 2002, when then Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) was also being nice to (the late) Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) on Thurmond’s 100th birthday, he was called a racist, excoriated by the MSM, and hounded so much that he eventually left the Senate.

So. Will the MSM call Obama to task the same way it called Lott to task? I’m not holding my breath since Obama has a ‘D’ behind his name, while Lott has an ‘R’ behind his name.

Let me give a big H/T to Cindi, Sr. Managing Editor of ConservativeNewsCentral.com and the Director of Graphics and Art for Anomalous Media, for inspiration for this article.

But that’s just my opinion.

“It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.” – Ronald Reagan

Cross-posted at RWNO, my personal web site.

North Korea's Dictator Leader Is Dead

The following is an AP press report.

PYONGYANG, North Korea (AP) – Kim Jong Il, North Korea’s mercurial and enigmatic longtime leader, has died of heart failure. He was 69.

In a “special broadcast” Monday from the North Korean capital, state media said Kim died of a heart ailment on a train due to a “great mental and physical strain” on Dec. 17 during a “high intensity field inspection.” It said an autopsy was done on Dec. 18 and “fully confirmed” the diagnosis.

Kim is believed to have suffered a stroke in 2008, but he had appeared relatively vigorous in photos and video from recent trips to China and Russia and in numerous trips around the country carefully documented by state media. The communist country’s “Dear Leader” – reputed to have had a taste for cigars, cognac and gourmet cuisine – was believed to have had diabetes and heart disease.

You can read more on the story here.

« Older Entries