Archive for the ‘Communism’ Category

David Brock is the founder of the ultra-liberal Media Matters for America. At one time, he played the role of a conservative journalist during the 1990s when he wrote the book The Real Anita Hill (1993) and authored the Troopergate story which led to Paula Jones filing a lawsuit against Bill Clinton. Brock is like Arianna Huffington, co-founder of the news website The Huffington Post, who also masqueraded as a conservative before returning to her liberal roots and becoming a mouthpiece for leftist causes. Like Brock, Huffington is a political opportunist.

David Brock has had it in for conservatives ever since he revealed that he came out as a homosexual and was not embraced by his conservative friends. He disavows his former political tactics as a conservative in his book Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative. The book has been described as “a public act of political atonement.” Here’s how Frank Bruni of The New York Times describes Brock’s motives for righting Blinded by the Right:

“Brock wants us to know that he did people wrong, and that he recognizes it. He wants us to understand that he was chasing fame and fleeing personal demons, and that the velocity of those efforts distracted him from the unwarranted damage he caused. And he wants us to believe him.”

One would think that such a confession would lead him to change his tactics. But it hasn’t happened as anyone who has ever read anything from Media Matters knows. Now we learn that Brock had a very specific agenda in starting the non-profit, tax-exempt Media Matters. It would be fighting against businesses, wealthy Americans, and conservative Christians.

“Media Matters for America (MMA) believes that news reporting and analysis by the American media, with its eye on profit margin and preservation of the status quo, has become biased,” read the group’s application, obtained by The Daily Caller, “It is common for news and commentary by the press to present viewpoints that tend to overly promote corporate interests, the rights of the wealthy, and a conservative, Christian-influenced ideology.”

Does any of this sound eerily familiar? This was the same tactic used by the Nazis against Jews. “The Nazi regime employed propaganda to impress upon German civilians and soldiers that the Jews were . . . dangerous enemies of the German Reich.” Jews were political scapegoats, a religious race to blame for Germany’s troubles. Media Matters and other liberal groups are following a similar methodology. Unless Christians can be shut up, we will never have any social progress.

A senior Obama administration official defended the efficacy of “class warfare” on his personal blog Monday by quoting the political philosopher and communist theorist Karl Marx.

Rick Bookstaber, who currently serves on the Financial Stability Oversight Council, the federal body established under the Dodd-Frank Act to “ensure the stability of our nation’s financial system,” took issue with conservative commentator Tucker Carlson’s accusations that liberals were engaging in “class warfare” by seeking to blame the nation’s fiscal problems on a small number of wealthy individuals.

“There is little that matches the artfulness of the rich in waving off criticism of the widening income gap as ‘class warfare,’” Bookstaber wrote. “And there is little that matches the gullibility of the rest in following along.”

“I am not picking sides in this war,” he added, “but I believe such a war is justifiable, and indeed ultimately inevitable.”

Bookstaber explained further, citing Marx:

During the industrial revolution class warfare centered on the length of the working day. A tightly defined working day only appeared with the advent of the industrial revolution. Before then laborers worked when they needed money, and then quit for a time once they fulfilled their needs. But regimentation and a dependable workforce became necessary once there was machinery to run and capital invested, and so with industrialization came the an enforced workday. So it is not surprising that Marx stated the central battle of class warfare at the time in terms of the working day:

The capitalist maintains his rights as a purchaser when he tries to make the working-day as long as possible, and to make, whenever possible, two working-days out of one. On the other hand, the peculiar nature of the commodity sold implies a limit to its consumption by the purchaser, and the laborer maintains his right as seller when he wishes to reduce the working-day to one of definite normal duration. There is here, therefore, an antinomy, right against right, both equally bearing the seal of the law of exchanges. Between equal rights force decides. Hence is it that in the history of capitalist production, the determination of what is a working-day, presents itself as the result of a struggle, a struggle between collective capital, i.e., the class of capitalists, and collective labour, i.e., the working-class. – Marx, Das Kapital

Marx’s work was widely appropriated throughout the 20th century by countries such as China and the former Soviet Union. Tens of millions of people were slaughtered under those regimes.

A COMPLETE SLAP IN THE FACE TO ISRAEL
by Tad Cronn

Nazi collaborator and American artist Gertrude Stein was among Jewish Americans praised in a White House announcement yesterday proclaiming Jewish Heritage Month.

The inclusion, noted by Algemeiner.com, in its original released form read, “Their history of unbroken perseverance and their belief in tomorrow’s promise offers a lesson not only to Jewish Americans, but to all Americans. From Aaron Copland to Albert Einstein, Gertrude Stein to Justice Louis Brandeis.”

Stein was a supporter and collaborator with the Nazis’ Vichy regime in France, according to Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has criticized a current Stein art exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.

According to Barbara Will, author of “Unlikely Collaboration: Gertrude Stein, Bernard Fay and the Vichy Dilemma,” Stein survived the Vichy regime because she was a strong supporter of the Nazis, publicly proclaiming her support of Adolf Hitler and proposing him for a Nobel Peace Prize in the mid-1930s.

She considered Gen. Phillipe Petain, the Nazi puppet who deported thousands of Jews, to be a French hero, and she volunteered to write an introduction to an English translation of his speeches so Americans could see the virtues of the Vichy government.

Dershowitz adds, “Stein’s closest friend, and a man who greatly influenced her turn toward fascism was Bernard Fay, who the Vichy government put in charge of hunting down Masons, Jews and other perceived enemies of the State. … After the war, when the horrendous results were known to all, Gertrude wrote in support of Fay when he was placed on trial for his Nazi war crimes.”

A White House official said the proclamation issued yesterday was an early draft that was mistakenly released. That was replaced with a new version that does not mention Stein, but the original remained on the White House website for several hours.

It’s hard to fathom how even a “draft” of a proclamation for Jewish Heritage Month includes a Nazi collaborator in the first place. It’s as if the White House press staff just opened up a book of famous Jewish names at random and said let’s take this one, without even reading the most basic biographical information about the person.

Or is this another example of the White House’s blind eye?

In a regime strongly sponsored by George Soros, whose first job was delivering eviction notices to Jews for the Nazis, it would not be surprising. According to the Ottawa Sun, as a teen Soros worked for the Judenrat, the Jewish council set up by the Nazis to round up Jews for the trains to the concentration camps. Asked by Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” if he had any regrets about those activities, Soros replied, “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there. If I wasn’t doing it, somebody else would be taking it away anyhow. Whether I was there or not. So I had no sense of guilt.”

Then there is the matter of the commander-in-chief’s decades-long acquaintance with the racist pastor Jeremiah Wright, during which President Obama claims to have noticed nothing unusual about Wright’s opinions. After Obama publicly distanced himself from Wright, the pastor said in an interview, “Them Jews ain’t going to let him talk to me.”

Since taking office, President Obama has often been notably cold toward Israel and openly sympathetic toward the Palestinians and other Muslim groups that would see Israel wiped off the Earth if they had their druthers.

Perhaps the proclamation praising Stein was just a mistake, or perhaps it was a case of “trickle-down” racism.

BILL AYERS TO UNIVERSITY STUDENTS: AMERICA‘S ’GAME IS OVER‘ AND ’ANOTHER WORLD’ IS COMING

Bill Ayers spoke at the University of Oregon last week on the subject of teaching and organizing for “social justice.” His speech was not free of the radical sentiments he is well-known for espousing (especially in the company of America’s youth). Case in point: he spoke of the end of America, a new world, and what our role ought to be in all of it.

(Related: Bill Ayers: ‘I Get Up Every Morning and Think…Today I’m Going to End Capitalism)

Almost as interesting as Ayers’ speech itself, perhaps, was how the leftist radical was introduced by the university students. One girl, who described herself as a doctoral student at the university, spoke of the privilege they would have with their honored guest, in an “evening [of] radical imagination.”

Two others, an associate professor at the university and a graduate student, remarked: “Most of us have in one way or another acknowledged the sovereign authority of the U.S. government– or the state of Oregon– in order to be here tonight, either admission to the university, applying for a job, or just paying the parking meter. We have not, however, asked permission of the [Native Americans] whose ancestral home this is, and to fail to acknowledge that this remains disputed territory would in effect be taking sides, [and] reinforce the erasure of indigenous history and indigenous peoples.”

When Ayers spoke, it was largely of how the “American Empire” is over, and what this means for her citizens (though there was a fair amount of “the wasteful American” theme throughout as well):
The great challenge for our generation [is] to find a way not just to live differently as individuals, but to find a way to think differently about what work means, to think differently about citizenship means, to think differently about what it means to be a ‘citizen of the world.’ One of the great dangers that we live in right now, is I don‘t think there’s any question, and I don’t think any of you would question, that the American Empire is in decline–that economically, and politically, and in some ways culturally, that we are in decline. And yet, the United States remains the most powerful, weaponized military system the Earth has ever known.
That’s a treacherous combination. A declining economic power, and an expanding military power. And we are going to have to find ways to re-imagine what it means to live in this coun–in this world. And here we are 4% of the world’s population, 4.5% of the world’s population, consuming vast amounts of natural resources, consuming vast amounts of finished goods, and no politician will say that the empire is declining and that the game is over.
It’s over. Now what? [Emphasis added]
Perhaps we will transform into a Euro-style state, though that was not a peaceful transition for Europeans, Ayers noted:

And you know, my optimistic friends say: “Oh boy, we’re going to look like Germany, or England, or France,“ and I think ”Jeese.” I mean, first of all, for England and France and Germany to become non-empires it took the deaths of millions and millions of people, so let’s remember that.
On a less chilling, and far more familiar note, Ayers called Republicans racist militants:

But let’s also remember that as power shifts, and as people feel something changing, they can either embrace it as a possible good thing in the world, or they can hold on to and become more, you know, reactionary. More racist, more militaristic, and that’s happening too. So it shouldn’t surprise us to see the Republican primaries.
I don’t know about you but I watch the debates as if watching a train wreck, I mean I was just fascinated with it– my wife is just sickened by it– but, I thought it was interesting and also telling that that is a tendency that we’re going to see more and more of.
But how does the leftist radical see the world from here? With all of the protests and the great changes throughout the world, what does Bill Ayers see for our future?

And that means, for me that means, that it’s our responsibility to fight here and now for a little more democracy, a little more participation, a little more peace, and keep putting our shoulder on that wheel because the opposition is fighting for– you know, another world is definitely coming, but that doesn‘t mean it’s going to be a better world, and it’s our responsibility to jump in.

Movement trying to distance itself from anarchy ring

by AARON KLEIN

The FBI criminal complaint seems to go to great lengths to not mention Occupy. Instead, the 21-page document – reviewed by WND – refers a number of times to “events” attended by the suspects. The “events” were Occupy protests.

Get Aaron Klein’s “Red Army: The Radical Network that must be defeated to save America” from WND’s Superstore

WND was first to report last week that Occupy had partnered with anarchy groups to engage in joint “direct action.”

Douglas L. Wright, 26; Brandon L. Baxter, 20; and Anthony Hayne, 35; were arrested yesterday by members of the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force on charges of conspiracy and attempted use of explosive materials to damage property affecting interstate commerce.

Also arrested were Connor C. Stevens, 20; and Joshua S. Stafford, 23. Charges are pending against them.

The FBI said it had a source and an undercover agent who infiltrated the anarchy ring, which plotted to detonate the explosives last night on Ohio’s Route 82 Brecksville-Northfield High Level Bridge.

The bridge carries a four-lane highway over part of the Cuyahoga Valley National Park in the Brecksville area, about 15 miles south of downtown Cleveland, the FBI said.

Occupy members

Multiple news media outlets today quoted sources in the Cleveland-area Occupy as recognizing the suspects.

Johnny Peskar, an Occupy leader, told msnbc.com that Occupy organizers had seen a few in the plot hanging around earlier events, but their actions were “autonomous,” he said.

“We don’t need any implications in this nonsense,” Peskar said.

Occupy Cleveland canceled today’s May Day protests upon news of the arrests.

The London Daily Mail also quoted an Occupy Cleveland member as saying at least some of the suspects had attended the group’s events.

WND found Baxter was described in March as an “Occupy member” by Cleveland’s Plain Dealer newspaper.

On March 5, the paper reported that “five members of Occupy Cleveland were arrested Monday after they protested property foreclosures by interrupting a sheriff’s sale.”

The paper quoted “Brandon Baxter of Lakewood” as saying “he had no regrets for making sure people heard the message.” The FBI document notes Baxter is from Lakewood.

Continued Baxter: “I took the risk of getting arrested because I feel the powers that be, whoever they might be – on all levels of government and those who hold corporate power – are not listening because not enough people are actually taking a stance” against foreclosures, he said.

“I was hoping that this would be a great way to get Cleveland more involved by showing the potential that a small group of dedicated people can have in making an impact. Even though we are not in any government position or in Congress, we do have the power.”

WND further found that Baxter set up an Occupy Facebook page titled “Stand with the Occupy Movement Against Suppression!”

The FBI complaint, meanwhile, seems to go out of its way to not mention Occupy. It details how a confidential FBI source attended an Oct. 21 protest “event” and “identified four suspicious males with walkie-talkie radios around their necks.” Three of the four had masks covering their faces.

While the event referenced wasn’t named, that very day Occupy Cleveland held its Occupy the Banks operation.

One suspect, Wright, said he believed leaders at the “event” were conspiring with corporate America and police, and he needed to recruit from outside that group, in homeless shelters and neighborhoods, the FBI complaint states.

The FBI document described how an undercover agent sold faulty C4 explosives to the group, purportedly to be detonated on the bridge last night in the lead up to today’s nationwide May Day protests.

The FBI document relates that at end of March, Baxter talked about getting a permit for an “upcoming festival” in Cleveland and believed he was going to have a difficult time getting one.

Once again, the FBI document doesn’t identify the festival. However, WND found that “Occupy and Friends” in April announced its “Occupy the Heart Street Festival.”

Occupy partners with anarchy group

While Occupy leaders attempt to distance their group from the Ohio anarchists, WND reported last week Occupy has partnered with an anarchy movement to deploy joint chaotic actions aimed at protesting capitalism.

Two weeks ago, Occupy D.C. and an anti-capitalist group calling itself the Anarchist Alliance D.C. Network caused a ruckus at an International Monetary Fund convention. Protesters reportedly attached climbing ropes to security barricades outside the main IMF entry checkpoint and pulled them down. Other ropes were used to pull down obstacles along the path delegates used to attend the meetings.

Protesters stormed several hotels where IMF delegates were staying, including the Washington Circle Hotel and the Mayflower.

A Facebook “anarchy” page was created in the run-up to the IMF event. The page, titled “Anarchy Spring training and IMF protest in DC-April 19th to 20th-2012,” served as an online planning forum.

The Occupy Wall Street website initiated a subsection titled “anarchy” in which related events are posted. The site boasts of a Manhattan protest earlier this month, following an anarchy book fair, in which agitators marched through the streets turning over trash cans and spraying anarchy symbols on local businesses. Protesters reportedly used eight-foot-long metal pipes to smash the windows of a Starbucks in New York’s East Village.

One group, calling itself the First of May Anarchist Alliance, has partnered with Occupy to protest the Trayvon Martin shooting.

The anarchy tactics apparently come directly from the playbook of a direct-action organization known as the Ruckus Society, which helped to spark the 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle that turned violent.

Ruckus is directly tied to Occupy. WND previously reported how official direct-action training resources for Occupy events include several manuals from the Ruckus Society.

Ruckus was also listed as a “friend and partner” of Occupy events, including the movement’s Days of Action held in October 2011.

Ruckus is funded by the George Soros-financed Tides Center, which has been involved in Occupy since the movement’s onset.

Another grantee of Tides is the Adbusters magazine, which first announced the Occupy movement. MoveOn.org, which has joined Occupy, is funded by Tides.

With research by Brenda J. Elliott

In a rare public appearance, The Obama Administration’s Information Czar Cass Sunstein gave a lecture at the NYU Law School in NYC yesterday, prompting Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange to attend. Watch as Luke confronts Sunstein multiple times on an academic paper he co-authored back in 2008 entitled “Conspiracy Theories” in which he called for cognitive infiltration of conspiracy groups by the government.

You can download the paper for free here: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1084585

Listen to the teaching of the Unions and George Soros.

Occupy Wall Street demonstrators, whose anti-greed message spread worldwide during an eight-week encampment in Lower Manhattan last year, plan marches across the globe today calling attention to what they say are abuses of power and wealth.
Organizers say they hope the coordinated events will mark a spring resurgence of the movement after a quiet winter. Calls for a general strike with no work, no school, no banking and no shopping have sprung up on websites in Toronto, Barcelona, London, Kuala Lumpur and Sydney, among hundreds of cities in North America, Europe and Asia.

The Occupy movement in New York has relied on demonstrations and marches around the city since Nov. 15, when police ousted hundreds of protesters from their headquarters in Zuccotti Park near Wall Street, where they had camped since Sept. 17.
Banks have pooled resources and cooperated to gather intelligence after learning of plans to picket 99 institutions and companies, followed by what organizers have described as an 8 p.m. “radical after-party” in an undetermined Financial District location.
“If the banks anticipate outrage from everyday citizens, it’s revealing of their own guilt,” said Shane Patrick, a member of the Occupy Wall Street press team. “If they hadn’t been participating in maneuvers that sent the economy into the ditch, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.”
Police Prepared
New York police can handle picketers, according to Paul Browne, the department’s chief spokesman.
“We’re experienced at accommodating lawful protests and responding appropriately to anyone who engages in unlawful activity, and we’re prepared to do both,” he said in an interview.
About 2,100 Occupy Wall Street protesters in New York have been arrested since the demonstrations began, said Bill Dobbs, a member of the group’s media-relations team.
In U.S. District Court in Manhattan yesterday, four City Council members accused JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Brookfield Office Properties Inc. (BPO), Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, of suppressing free speech and using excessive force against protesters.
Organizers describe the May Day events as a coming together of the Occupy movement, with activists also calling for more open immigration laws, expanded labor rights and cheaper financing for higher education. Financial institutions remain a primary target of the protests.
Bigger Banks
“Four years after the financial crisis, not a single of the too-big-to-fail banks is smaller; in fact, they all continue to grow in size and risk,” the group’s press office said in an April 26 e-mail.
Five banks — JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup Inc. (C), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) together held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, equal to 56 percent of the U.S. economy, compared with 43 percent in 2006, according to central bankers at the Federal Reserve.
Occupy Wall Street began planning for May Day in January, meeting in churches and union halls with a decision-making system that avoids a single leader. Instead, participants rely on group “break-out” sessions in which clusters discuss such tasks as crowd-building, logistics and communications.
About 150 attended an April 25 meeting at the Greenwich Village headquarters of the Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers Union, making last-minute preparations for how to deploy legal and medical help; site selection for picketing; purchasing, production and distribution of protest signs; and how to talk to reporters.
Blockades Planned
The meeting convened inside the union hall basement, where attendees arranged chairs in a circle as three facilitators asked each of the assembled to identify themselves by first name and gender — he, she or they. Most appeared under age 30, though gray-haired baby boomers also participated. One of the older attendees pulled a ski mask over his head to protest the presence of a photographer from Tokyo.
Today, beginning at 8 a.m. in Bryant Park, scheduled events include teach-ins, art performances and a staging area for “direct action and civil disobedience,” such as bank blockades.
Tom Morello of the Grammy Award-winning rock band Rage Against the Machine along with 1,000 other guitar-playing musicians will accompany a march to Union Square at 2 p.m., according to the maydaynyc.org website. That will be followed by a “unity rally” at Union Square at 4 p.m.; a march from there to Wall Street at 5:30 p.m.; and a walk to a staging area for “evening actions,” which organizers at the April 25 meeting said would be the so-called after-party.
Golden Gate
Occupy-related events are planned in 115 cities throughout the U.S., from college towns such as Amherst, Massachusetts, and Ann Arbor, Michigan, to Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago and Philadelphia.
In San Francisco, a group calling itself the Golden Gate Bridge Labor Coalition abandoned a plan to close the span while carrying on with a day of picketing to support bridge, ferry and bus workers seeking reduced health-care benefit costs, according to its website. Protesters still plan a rally at 7 a.m. at the toll plaza, without blocking the bridge, the group said in a statement.
Across the bay in Oakland, protesters said they intend morning marches on banks and the Chamber of Commerce, followed by an afternoon rally and a march downtown.
“We’re looking forward to vigorously asserting our constitutional right to protest and giving a loud outcry about Wall Street and greed,” Dobbs said. “We’re hoping this will make a splash. We hope it will bring a lot of more people into the Occupy movement.”
To contact the reporters on this story: Henry Goldman in New York at hgoldman@bloomberg.net; Esmé E. Deprez in New York at edeprez@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephen Merelman at smerelman@bloomberg.net

by Sher Zieve
The revolutionary and Luciferian (he dedicated his book “Rules for Radicals” to Lucifer…aka Satan) Saul Alinsky said ““True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.” Alinsky also taught that community organizing (aka ‘teaching radicalism and Satanic concepts’) must begin at the local level and in a forceful manner. Karl Marx, his partner Frederich Engels and Vladimir Lenin wrote and believed the same. Adolph Hitler, along with Marx and the rest, also believed that environmental elements and ‘saving the planet’ were excellent ploys to be brought into every speech and were needed in order to shame and bully a population into submission. It worked—and still works—remarkably well.

Today, in the USA and the rest of the world, we now have the UN Agenda 21—which, in New Rochelle, NY (as well as other towns and cities throughout the nation), is attempting implementation via ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). At one fell swoop, a city becomes part of the “international community” and is no longer accountable to its State or nation. And without the population realizing it, the city becomes part of the international order and one-world government commences with its attendant end to freedom, self-determination and the right to make any life decisions on one’s own. Thus, the end of liberty—and life as we know it—begins.

So it is in New Rochelle, New York.

Robert Cox is the Managing Editor of Talk of the Sound, the leading news web site in New Rochelle, NY.

Cox has been a pioneer in citizen journalism since 2002. As President of the Media Bloggers Association, he opened the door for bloggers to cover presidential debates, major sporting events, federal courts and corporate shareholder meetings, to name a few. He worked with a major insurance company to create the first-ever media liability insurance product for bloggers. He partnered with Harvard Law School and the Poynter Institute, to create a training program on media liability for online publishers at NewsU. Cox was part of the inaugural exhibit on citizen journalism at the Newseum in Washington, DC as the first blogger formally credentialed to cover a federal trial (US. v. Lewis “Scooter” Libby). He has lectured at numerous events at journalism conferences and journalism schools, events for the federal judiciary and new media conferences. He has appeared on all of the major cable news networks and numerous national talk radio shows.

Cox has a BA from the University of Notre Dame and MBA from the University of Chicago. He lives in New Rochelle, NY with his wife and children.

The Interview
Sher: Robert, thanks so much for taking the time, today, to speak to my readers. When we spoke a few days ago, we talked at length about how Agenda 21 has been introduced into the New Rochelle community via ICLEI or the “International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.” Through ICLEI, the United Nations’ Agenda 21—which is designed to take over all local authority via its guise of a “sustainability agenda”—takes control of and makes decisions on virtually everything within a city and/or county. What initially prompted you to school yourself on Agenda 21 and to pursue a campaign against it?

Robert: During his annual State of the City Address in 2009, Mayor Bramson announced that New Rochelle was one of three localities selected for an ICLEI Pilot Program. That was the first time I had ever heard the word “ICLEI”. I am sure that many of the people in room applauding the announcement had never heard of ICLEI either. I later learned that many believed that the Mayor was announcing some sort of federal grant.
I have learned that when our Mayor is talking about something I have never heard of before, it is a good idea to do some research. The more I learned about ICLEI the more concerned I became about it.

Sher: New Rochelle’s Mayor Noam Bramson has been highly in favor of pushing the ICLEI agenda onto the city and may not have provided accurate information about what may or will befall New Rochelle if the program is implemented. What has been his response to your enlightening the community as to the real extent of its (and his) purpose?

Robert: My deepest concern with ICLEI in New Rochelle is that our Mayor and his supporters have gone to great lengths to misrepresent ICLEI as a homegrown association of local governments staffed by eager 30-something staffers who want to do good. The Mayor has repeatedly denied any association between New Rochelle and the United Nations despite the undeniable and rather obvious fact that New Rochelle is a member of ICLEI and ICLEI is a part of the UN system to implement Agenda 21.

When an ICLEI representative appeared before our City Council she flat-out lied in responding to a direct question on the origins and funding of ICLEI.

I might add that our City Council never held a vote to authorize joining ICLEI. When asked about this at a public meeting by Council Member Louis Trangucci, our City Manager said that joining ICLEI was implied when the ICLEI representative spoke before Council.

As for our Mayor, he has sought to demonize and demagogue the issue. He refuses to address legitimate questions about ICLEI, instead engaging in ad hominem attacks. As the leading critic of ICLEI in New Rochelle, much of his vitriol has been directed at me. A fair amount has gone to Council Member Trangucci who was the only member of Council to vote against the Mayor’s Local Agenda 21 Plan named GreeNR.

Sher: One of the things we discussed over the phone was that Mayor Bramson had told you and others that “there is no relationship between New Rochelle and the UN”. Yet, a husband and wife team (Steven and Mrs. Nakashima) in the community who were appointed by Mayor Bramson to assist in implementing the program both work for the United Nations. I also understand that Mrs. Nakashima’s work at the UN involves running an Agenda 21 organization. Has Mayor Bramson explained his previous contradictory statement?

Robert: The Mayor has repeatedly dismissed any expression of concern about the connections between his GreeNR plan and ICLEI and the UN’s Agenda 21 Plan as the stuff of conspiracy theories.
Not only is there a direct connection between ICLEI and the UN but the mayor appointed a UN employee to his advisory board, the spouse of a senior UN official.

Steven Nakashima is a UN employee who works in the Avian Flu program. His wife is Sophie de Caen. She is the Director of the $1 billion MDG Achievement Fund in New York. MDG stands for Millennium Development Goals. Goal 7, but listed first on her site, is Environment and Climate Change where the stated goal is to “integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes”.

I have, so far, found direct connections to the UN for two other Advisory Board members.

Sher: What are you now doing to educate the people of New Rochelle and other communities about these organizations’ true agenda of eliminating the sovereignty of the USA and individual States, in favor of a one world government organization?

Robert: My focus is to educate New Rochelle residents on the large gap between the Mayor’s rhetoric and reality at a local level. It is enough for me to educate residents on the fact that New Rochelle joined ICLEI without any public hearing or public discussion or City Council vote. That our being part of the ICLEI pilot program has not been the source of federal grant money but instead has required spending hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I want New Rochelleans to understand that the Mayor is not being factual when he denies any connection between his GreeNR plan and the United Nations. There is the direct connection that runs from ICLEI to Local Agenda 21 to Agenda 21 and the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. His GreeNR plan is a UNCSD Local Agenda 21 Plan. It does not get any more direct than that.

Sher: If anyone would like to reach you for more information or to invite you for a speaking engagement, how should they contact you?

Robert: The best way to reach me is through the contact information on Talk of the Sound.

Sher: Thanks again, Robert, and we wish you the very best!

Is America Embracing the 10 Tenets of the Communist Manifesto?

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the purported founders of communism, established in the 19th century a government paradigm that transformed Europe and other regions in the eastern hemisphere, adding to an already expansive repertoire of political ideologies. And the seemingly farfetched assertion that communism could someday take control of America seems, quite simply, unfathomable. But is it really that improbable, or furthermore, has it already ensnared certain sectors of society?

Writing for The Blaze, Tiffany Gabbay recently produced a thoughtful exposé entitled “Are We Headed Toward the Constitution or the Communist Manifesto?” that breaks down the 10 tenets of Marx and Engels’ infamous 1848 publication and describes how those 10 steps or “planks” to establish communism are slowly being woven into American society. In prefacing her piece, which was published on Saturday, Gabbay quotes the British philosopher Anthony Flew, who exploited Marx’s blatant disregard for the truth:

… the first and only volume of Das Kapital to be published in the lifetime of Marx was, in his own words, to demonstrate that “In proportion as capital accumulates, the lot of the labourer must grow worse. Accumulation of wealth at one pole is at the same time accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation at the opposite pole.” But by 1867, when that volume was first published, Marx had known for 15 or more years that this thesis was false.

In describing how the Communist Manifesto’‘s key tenets stack up against the U.S. Constitution, and society as a whole, Gabbay’s argument should provoke alarm, as the republic founded centuries ago, which was built on the concept of freedom and justice, has been tainted with characteristics of an illegal and despotic political structure.

The first ideal under the microscope is the abolition of private property, and while the complete confiscation of private assets is not fully developed here in the United States, such freedom is enjoyed not in its entirety. Eminent domain, for example, has arguably violated the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which prevents the government from confiscating private property “for public use, without just compensation.”

Now, what the government determines to be “fair and just” is often arbitrary, and regardless of the dollar amount agreed upon, the citizen’s property is still confiscated with or without the owner’s blessing. Moreover, politicians stretch what is acceptable under the Constitution’s “public good” charge, as they often acquire land or property through eminent domain to launch public works projects designed to “improve communities,” by building such things as freeways, schools, libraries, and public utilities. And following the Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. City of New London, the use of eminent domain greatly expanded in scope to include reforming “depressed areas” — meaning, a private citizen’s home could be seized by government bureaucrats to construct shopping malls and sports complexes on their land.

Another tenet included in the Communist Manifesto advocates a highly progressive income tax. This ideal is an archetype of class warfare, as Marx and Engels believed the upper echelon of society must have their wealth redistributed to establish so-called “social equality.” This progressive tax structure is evident in President Obama’s “Buffett Rule” tax plan, which would set a minimum tax rate of 30 percent on the nation’s highest earners. And the consequences of not adhering to the U.S. government’s progressive tax code are draconian, including imprisonment, the freezing of bank accounts, and the confiscation of personal property.

The third tenet under the Communist Manifesto deals with abolishing the rights of inheritance, such as the estate tax, more commonly known as the “death tax.” The abolition of inheritance was evident in Marx’s ideology, as he strove to eliminate all physical property upon a person’s death, which in a subtler form, has woven itself into the U.S. political system. Ms. Gabbay explains how the estate tax is not only unconstitutional, but it delivers the IRS another arbitrary stream of income for it to disperse at its own discretion:

First, many argue the estate tax is unconstitutional because it creates a direct tax that is not disbursed to the states for collection. But the more obvious discrepancy is that it allows the government to tax individuals twice, as the items that find their way into one’s estate — be they a car, house, land, jewelry or other valuable possessions — have already been subject to either sales or property tax once before. The Federal government’s carte blanche to double-dip is spurred further by Democrats’ renewed push to resurrect and expand what the Wall Street Journal dubs President Obama’s “night of living death tax.”

Another unconstitutional, and communistic-inspired entity, is the Federal Reserve, America’s national bank which exerts unprecedented power to set monetary policy with the intent of “stabilizing” the economy. All in all, the impact central bankers have had on the U.S. economy has been devastating, by, for instance, devaluing the dollar and spiking inflation rates by printing more and more money.

“One of the fundamental problems with the U.S. economy right now is the Federal Reserve thinks the answer to all our economic problems is printing money,” asserted Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal. “We haven’t created new jobs from all of this printing of money, but what we have produced is inflation in prices.” (The actual definition of inflation is an increase in the amount of currency in circulation, which in turn causes an increase in prices.)

One of the more widely perceived tenets of the Communist Manifesto is its stance on the “equality of labor,” which often take the form of labor unions and their intimate relations with government. While unions themselves are not nationalized organizations, many develop a strong bond with government leaders, resulting in favoritism in the area of labor policy.

Another example of labor control comes from the Labor Department’s policies in the area of Affirmative Action, which forces private businesses to adhere to a staff-quota consisting of minorities, women, and people with disabilities. This mandate imposes a blatant confiscation of individual rights, as it ties the hands of business owners who desire to hire employees based on merit, not on the color of their skin or other characteristics.

Nationalized education, which is glaringly evident in the United States, is also a tenet of the Marx-Engels communist ideology. In America’s K-12 education system, despotic bureaucrats have largely seized the parents’ rights to choose their school districts, they have imposed certain religious teachings on children, and have decided what can and cannot be consumed during lunch break.

Among the remaining tenets propagated in the Communist Manifesto — government ownership of factories, combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, centralized control of transportation and communication, and the confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels — Gabbay points to nationalized healthcare, the unspoken 11th plank of the Marx-Engels brand of communism.

If President Obama’s landmark healthcare overhaul makes it past the Supreme Court, a blatantly unconstitutional precedent will be set that grants the U.S. government a supreme and tyrannical authority over citizens’ health and well-being. Gabbay sums up her article by countering the inevitable charge, that all those who claim America is embracing communism are fanatical:

Some balk at the use of the word “Communism,” dismissing its invocation as hyperbole. Yet when dissecting actual policies, laws, regulations and bureaucratic government approaches which Americans are increasingly subjected to, and weighing them against the 10 progressive “rules to live by,” the facts scream loudly and clearly in the face of those who deny the ever-creeping onset of Socialism. Marx’s Communist “utopia” is only one evolutionary stage away from reality.

Who Are The 81 Socialists In Congress?

Introduction: Lenin says that anyone that is a Socialist is a Communist.
Before we answer the question posed above, it is vitally
important to understand that those within the radical left
wing movement in America today no longer call themselves “socialists” or “communists” (or even “liberals” in some cases).
The radical left wing has rebranded itself as the “Progressive Movement” and “progressives” are presently operating at the highest levels in our government and advancing their socialist ideology, while shielded from the vilifying labels of “communism” and “socialism”.

Why was rebranding necessary? Why do socialists and communists now call themselves “progressives”? Part of the answer can be found in a recent PEW Research Center survey which indicated that 68% of Americans react positively to the word “Progressive” while only 23% have a negative reaction. On the other hand, 59% of Americans have a negative reaction to the word “Socialism” while only 29% have a positive reaction to the word. But don’t be confused by the name change. Slick marketing does not change the fact that the terms “Progressive” and “Socialist” are virtually synonymous in politics today; nor does it change the fact that the most prominent manifestation of the socialist (progressive) political machine today, the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), presently holds the reins of power and constitutes the largest voting block of Democrats in House of Representatives.

This group of 81 representatives and senators has deep and long-standing ties to the socialist movement in America and is presently pushing its Marxist agenda into legislation, strategically dismantling the constitution in the process.
_______________________
“In more recent years, the Congressional Progressive Caucus has gone underground in respect to their connection to the Democratic Socialists of America. Their roster is no longer published on the DSA website and they no longer publicly acknowledge their loyalty to the socialist organization.”
– Jeremiahproject.com [1]
_______________________ The most recent example of pushing this Marxist agenda into legislation is the passing of the so-called health care reform bill. CPC members pushed this bill, nurtured it and rammed it down our throats through parliamentary trickery in the dark of night… not to reform health care, but rather, to transform the United States into a socialist country.
Throughout the rest of this report, we will examine the history and membership of the CPC (and a complete list of CPC members can be found at the conclusion of this report).
We will expose the CPC’s deeply held socialist beliefs, and its close ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, (DSA) a group committed to neo-Marxist ideology.
We will also expose the CPC’s role in the dangerous, and perhaps treasonous, global socialist movement, and the CPC’s ties to Socialist International (SI), whose members seek world domination.
The Congressional Progressive Caucus – A Socialist Collective:
As previously mentioned, the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) is perhaps the most powerful, caucus within the United States Congress with over 80 declared members, and works to advance progressive issues and positions.
The Caucus is co-chaired by Representatives Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA).
Of the 20 standing committees of the House of the House of Representatives, 11 are chaired by members of the CPC. [2]
The CPC’s founding statement highlights a list of bold initiatives that are intended to consolidate power, out of the hands of citizens and into the grip of the government, and centralize the planning of our economy. The founding statement of purpose also calls for so-called “social justice” and promotes the redistribution of wealth through higher taxation on corporations and wealthy individuals. Of course, placing such an unfair burden on successful companies is merely a means to an end.
Ironically, the ultimate purpose of such wealth redistribution is not to level the playing field for all Americans, but rather, to strangle productivity and legalize government meddling in all major industry, as we are currently seeing in the auto, banking, and oil industries. In short, the ultimate purpose is control.
Another goal outlined in the CPC’s founding statement is the re-allotment of military spending. At a time when our enemies are more determined and focused than ever, the CPC intends to weaken our military presence in the world. This makes perfect sense
from the perspective of the larger goal of installing a global socialist regime to manage the affairs of the world. And for that to happen, the American military must be subjugated to the demands of the “common global good”.
Another tenant of the CPC is to create an ever-growing government that seeks to control the everyday lives of American families. The founding platform calls for a “substantial increase in federal funding for social programs”.[2]
Through instituting massive tax increases, the CPC seeks to control everything; the health care we receive… the food we eat… and even the manner in which we worship.
Exemplified by the current government takeover of health care, this faction of congressional leaders is succeeding in penetrating into key facets of our lives. It has begun its intrusion into religion by seeking to legalize the perversion of marriage and criminalize speech which runs counter to the radical homosexual political agenda. This is also obviously a pruning of the cherished tenant of free speech.
The non-profit organization most closely associated with the Congressional Progressive Caucus is the American Progressive Caucus Policy Foundation, which works to connect the caucus to progressives outside the Congress.
Although officially bi-partisan, the group’s mission is to raise funds and support progressive legislation in the House of Representatives. [2] Additionally, the CPC is also populated by members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), whose agenda is markedly anti-capitalist, and ironically neither Democratic nor American.
The History of the CPC:
The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) was established in 1991 by six members of the United States House of Representatives: Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Ron Dellums (DCA), Lane Evans (D-IL), Thomas Andrews (D-ME), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), and Maxine Waters (D-CA).
The founding members reasoned their agenda was necessitated by the economic hardship imposed by the deepening recession. What better apparatus to use than the Democratic Party to advance the directives of the DSA? The CPC may soft-pedal its Socialist ideology in the new Congress, but a 1999 position paper on economic inequality clearly
shows their rejection of capitalism and the free market.
_______________________
“On November 11, 1999, the Progressive Caucus drafted its Position Paper on economic inequality. It reads, in part, as follows: ‘Economic inequality is the result of two and a half decades of government policies and rules governing the economy being tilted in favor of large asset owners at the expense of wage earners. Tax policy, trade policy, monetary policy, government regulations and other rules have reflected this pro-investor bias. We propose the introduction or reintroduction of a package of legislative initiatives that will close America’s economic divide and address both income and wealth disparities.’”[3]
_______________________
And clearly, CPC members in Congress have already taken advantage of the current financial crisis to push for the regulation of major industries, Wall Street, our health care system, the auto industry and seek to control just about every other industry through the
promoting of so-called Cap and Trade legislation.
In 2005 the Progressive Caucus crafted its “Progressive Promise” document… a document which advocated the following positions:
-Establishing universal, government provided health care.
-Trade agreements that favor the rights foreign workers over Americans.
-The right of all workers to organize into labor unions and engage in collective bargaining.
-The abolition of the USA PATRIOT Act.
-The legalization of same-sex marriage.
-A complete pullout from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
-An increase in income tax rates.
-An increase in welfare spending by the federal government.
As you can readily see, many of these positions are being transformed into policy right before our very eyes; and additionally, these positions are extremely similar in scope and posture to those of the DSA.
The Democratic Socialists of America The CPC has deep connections to the Democratic Socialists of America and openly promotes its ideology. The DSA is the socialist organization in America today with
thousands of members working to bring about the end of our republic as we know it.
In 1999 WorldNetDaily.com reported that the DSA hosted the website of the CPC.
Within days of the publication of this report, the CPC removed its site from the DSA server and information connecting the organizations was then washed from the webs of the CPC and DSA. Despite this cursory attempt to distance themselves for one another, the DSA and the Progressive Caucus remain intimately linked. Seventy of the 83 Progressive Caucus members also belong to DSA. [4]
Don’t be fooled by the use of the word “democratic”. It is really nothing more than a red herring meant to distance this socialist movement from its true leftist roots.
Since the turn of the twentieth century, the socialist movement in American has stumbled forward achieving some small measure of success, at various times, in fits and starts.
Of course, left wing radicals have never had an enduring socialist organization in America. The DSA was formed in 1983 from the merger of two foundering socialist groups, The New American Movement (NAM) and The Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC).
To go even deeper and really take the mask off of the DSA, to reveal its true colors, we must also take a look at a group called Socialists International, (SI).
The DSA is the American arm of this world-wide organization. Its agenda is basically to install a one-world order to manage global trade and environmental resources and impose its will on all people regardless of national or regional government.
“Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists. It continues to do so, sprinkling its calls for socialism and global governance with assurances of support for ‘democratic’ principles. However, its democratic bona fides and its supposed opposition to
totalitarian socialism are as threadbare today as they ever have been.” – NewAmerican.com [5]
Bolstered by the ear of a sympathetic regime which has usurped the White House, SI now has tremendous influence… the likes of which it has never enjoyed.
In addition to the White House, SI, through the CPC, has the ear of more than 30 percent of the Democratic Majority in the House of Representatives… almost 20 percent of the entire House of Representatives.
Who Are The Socialists In Congress?
Some of the key players (past and present) in this hostile group (the CPC) are profiled below.
Nancy Pelosi was the chair of the CPC until she was elected Speaker of the House. She is also a member of the DSA. Pelosi’s record attests to her anticapitalist, pro-union positions, winning her a 93% approval rating from the ACLU.
Her socialist leanings are clear. Consider the following comments Pelosi made on property rights during an appearance on Meet The Press which are summarized below in an article appearing in Human Events.
[According to Pelosi] If we put offshore drilling on the table, we get to put a whole lot of other issues on the table, like tax breaks for oil companies, and even levying new taxes on oil companies for using the oil that “belongs to the American people.” She went on and on for 5 minutes talking about how these oil companies profit off of oil that “is the American people’s”… Nancy forgot, this country is based on ~240 years of PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, including mineral rights. [6]
Bernie Sanders is the mastermind and founder of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and a self-described socialist.
In 1990 Bernie Sanders, who ran for local office previously as a Socialist, was elected to the House of Representatives as an Independent. Sanders served eight terms in the House.
In 2004 he won 69% of the vote against Democratic and Republican challengers and was elected to the senate.
Just before his election to the U.S. Senate, again, as an Independent, the 65-year-old New York transplant was asked by a Washington Post reporter: “Are you now or have you ever been a Socialist?” Sanders replied, “Yeah. I wouldn’t deny it. Not for one second.” Barak Obama is no longer an official member of the CPC since he is no longer a Member of Congress.
Obama’s socialist backing was a significant factor in his meteoric political rise. As reported by Cliff Kincaid with Accuracy in Media.
“Obama’s socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat …. Obama’s stint as a “community organizer” in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed
and backed him, has been generally ignored.” [8]
Conclusion
With the sweeping changes that are coming about, forced on us by left wing ideological radicals who have taken over our government, it is easy to give up hope and believe that we should barricade ourselves in a compound with muskets and provisions.
However if the people of America who believe in the founding principles of this country… who believe in the ideals of personal and religious freedom… who believe in the God given rights of liberty… can realize the true socialist threat that confronts us, we
can expose it for what it truly is and defeat it.
So feel free, now that you have this exclusive report, to distribute it widely.
Print it out and share it with your friends and associates. Email it to those that you know. Together, we can spread the truth and the Truth shall set us free.
Current members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus:
Co-Chairs:
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)
Vice Chairs:
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)
Hon. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Senate Members:
Hon. Roland Burris (IL)
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)
Hon. Tom Udall (NM)
House Members:
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Earl Blumenauer (OR-03)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Judy Chu (CA-32)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OHe (OH-11)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Alcee Hastings (FL-23)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jim Moran (VA-08)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Frank Pallone (NJ-06)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Jared Polis (CO-02)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-39)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Notable Past Member:
Barack Hussein Obama

Organizations Promoted On The CPC Website
There’s an old expression; you are known by the company you keep. The organizations listed below are listed on the CPC website as movers-and-shakers within the “progressive political arena”. While most of them are obscure, some names such as ACORN, the NAACP, MoveOn.org, LaRaza, the ACLU, Amnesty International, Norman Lear’s
People for the American Way, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the AFL-CIO, the Sierra Club and a host of others are well known.
The listing of others, such as the American Library Association, might even surprise you.
Again, the inclusion of these fellow travelers is not exhaustive, nor is it based on the personal opinions of the writers and publishers or this report. The organizations below are prominently listed on the CPC website as organizations which promote the “progressive” agenda.

State Progressive Caucuses
Kansas Progressive Caucus

http://www.kansasprogressives.org/

Arizona Progressive Democrats

http://www.progressiveazdems.org/

California Progressive Caucus

http://www.progressivecaucuscdp.org/

Colorado Progressives

http://www.pdcolorado.org/

Idaho Progressive Caucus

http://www.idahoprogressives.org/

Illinois Progressives

http://www.illinoisprogressives.org/pdi/

Kentucky Progressive Democratic Caucus

http://www.kentuckyprogressives.org/

Louisiana

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LAFCCS

Maine Progressives

http://www.mainecaucus.net/

Michigan – The Justice Caucus

http://www.justicecaucus.org/index.htm

Minnesota Progressives

http://progressivecaucus.net/

Missouri Progressives

http://www.missouridems.org/local.asp?g=ProgressiveCaucusofMissouri

North Carolina Progressives

http://greendogs.org/

Ohio Progressive Democratic Caucus

http://www.ohioprogressives.org/

South Carolina Progressive Caucus

http://www.scprogressive.com/

Texas progressives

http://www.texaspopulists.com/

Utah Progressives

http://www.udpc.org/

Washington State Progressive Caucus

http://www.waprogressives.org/

Washington State Progressive Caucuses
http://www.pdcw.org/index.php The Progressive Democrats of Wisconsin

http://www.wisconsinprogressives.org/index.htm

Progressive Caucus of Democrats Abroad

http://progda.org/

Organizations
American Prospect

http://www.prospect.org/

Americans for Democratic Action

http://www.adaction.org

Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs

http://www.afop.org

Buzzflash

http://www.buzzflash.com/

Campaign for America’s Future

http://www.ourfuture.org

Center For American Progress

http://www.americanprogress.org/

Center for Progressive Leadership

http://www.progressleaders.org

Citizen Works

http://www.citizenworks.org/

Common Dreams News Center

http://www.commondreams.org/

Hip Hop Caucus

http://www.hiphopcaucus.org

In These Times

http://www.inthesetimes.com/

Institute for Policy Studies

http://www.ips-dc.org

League of United Latin American Citizens
http://www.lulac.org Mother Jones

http://www.motherjones.com/

Moveon.org

http://www.moveon.org

Moving Ideas

http://www.movingideas.org

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

http://www.naacp.org

National Council of LaRaza

http://www.nclr.org

OneWorld

http://www.oneworld.net

Progressive Democrats of America

http://www.pdamerica.org

Progressive Majority

http://www.progressivemajority.org

Progressive Populist

http://www.populist.com/

Public Citizen

http://www.citizen.org/

Public Interest Research Groups

http://www.pirg.org/

Rainbow Push Coalition

http://www.rainbowpush.org

The Nation

http://www.thenation.com/

The Progressive

http://www.progressive.org/

True Majority
http://www.truemajority.org Budget and Taxes
Center for Budget and Policy Priorities

http://www.cbpp.org/

Citizens for Tax Justice

http://www.ctj.org/

OMB Watch

http://www.ombwatch.org/

Civil and Human Rights
ADA Watch

http://www.adawatch.org/

Alliance for Justice

http://www.allianceforjustice.org

American Civil Liberties Union

http://www.aclu.org/

American Library Association

http://www.ala.org

Amnesty International

http://www.amnesty.org/

Child Labor Education and Action Project

http://clea.sit.edu

Human Rights Campaign

http://www.hrc.org

Human Rights Watch

http://www.hrw.org

Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies

http://www.jointcenter.org/

People for the American Way

http://www.pfaw.org/

Southern Poverty Law Center
http://www.splcenter.org/ Elections and Voting
Center for Voting and Democracy

http://www.fairvote.org/

Common Cause

http://www.commoncause.org/

Public Campaign

http://www.publiccampaign.org/

Environment and Energy
Friends of the Earth

http://www.foe.org

Sierra Club

http://www.sierraclub.org

Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade
Center for International Policy

http://www.ciponline.org/

Development Gap

http://www.developmentgap.org

Foreign Policy in Focus

http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/

Housing and Hunger
Second Harvest

http://www.secondharvest.org/

Labor and Economics
ACORN

http://www.acorn.org

AFL-CIO

http://www.aflcio.org/

Center for Law and Social Policy
http://www.clasp.org/ CorpWatch

http://www.corpwatch.org/

Dollars and Sense

http://www.igc.apc.org/dollars/

Economic Policy Institute

http://www.epinet.org/

Financial Markets Center

http://www.fmcenter.org/

Free the Children

http://www.freethechildren.org/

Global Exchange

http://www.globalexchange.org/

Jobs with Justice

http://www.jwj.org/

National Jobs for All Coalition

http://www.njfac.org/

National Labor Committee

http://www.nlcnet.org/

National Priorities Project

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/

The Multinational Monitor

http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/

Is the Family Farm About to be Outlawed by New Labor Regulations?
April 14, 2012 byGary DeMar

The family farm is in jeopardy. New Department of Labor (DOL) regulations could make it more expensive for family farms to survive. Traditionally, farms were productive and efficient because the entire family worked from before the time sun rose to when it set. As a result, the United States became the bread basket of the world, producing more food than it could consume.

The total number of farms in the United States in 2010 is estimated to be 2.2 million and most of them are family owned. Not all farms are created equal:

The “Corporate” farms account for only 3% of U.S. farms and 90% of those are family owned. However, the term “family farm” does not necessarily equate with “small farm”; nor does a “corporate farm” necessarily mean a large-scale operation owned and operated by a multi-national corporation. Many of the country’s largest agricultural enterprises are family owned. Likewise, many farm families have formed modest-sized corporations to take advantage of legal and accounting benefits of that type of business enterprise.

DOL Secretary Hilda Solis has proposed new rules that would restrict family farm operations by prohibiting anyone under the age of 18 from being near certain age animals without adult supervision. Many family farms hire young people from the local community. Their parents want them to learn farming skills. The goal for many families is to keep farms in the family.

The new regulations world include working with livestock such as vaccinating and hoof trimming, and handling most animals more than six months old, which could limit participation in 4-H and Future Farmers of America (FFA) activities and restrict their youth farm safety classes.

There are also new restrictions on operating farm machinery over 20 horsepower; completing tasks at elevations over six feet high; and working at stockyards and grain and feed facilities. The language of the proposed rules is so specific it would even ban youth from operating a battery powered screwdriver or a pressurized garden hose.

In most states, a 16-year-old can get a license to drive an automobile, own a gun, skate board, ride a motorcycle, and mountain climb. These are all dangerous activities. Will these be regulated next?

If these regulations go into effect, a number of things could happen. First, long-held family farms might have to be sold, possibility to foreign interests. Second, costs will go up as more non-family labor will have to be hired at a higher price. Third, illegal aliens will have to make up the short fall in labor pools. Fourth, if finding workers becomes difficult, farms may have to be sold off for other uses or abandoned. Fifth, the need to hire more bureaucrats to police our nation’s families and farms. Sixth, the possibility that the definition of “farm” will be expanded to include families that grow their own food, use power tools, and ride sit-down mowers.

LENIN SAID “IF YOU ARE A SOCIALIST THEN YOU ARE A COMMUNIST”

Rep. Allen West’s remark that up to 80 members of the House are communists was a reference to the membership of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which was founded by a U.S. socialist group, the Democratic Socialists of America.

Some Caucus members still demonstrate a close working relationship with the socialist group.

West’s spokesman, Tim Edson, clarified in a statement today that West was referring to the Congressional Progressive Caucus in his talk with voters last night in Palm City, Fla.

Edson declared that the Florida Republican “stands by his words.”

“But the words the media needs to pay attention to are the words of the members of the Progressive Caucus,” the spokesman said. “They speak for themselves. Call it what you may, but these House members are clearly not proponents of capitalism, free markets or individual economic freedom. Website hosted by socialists

The Congressional Progressive Caucus, or CPC, boasts more than 80 members.

In the January/February 1998 issue of the Chicago DSA’s New Ground publication, Ron Baiman identified Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an avowed socialist, and Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts as leaders of the Progressive Caucus in Congress, which DSA “helped to organize.”

Until November 2002, the website of the Progressive Caucus was hosted by the DSA. WND reported as early as 1998 on the progressive congressional faction. Eventually the website being hosted by the socialist organization and the list of CPC names was moved to Sanders’ website and later to its own site.

The issue of the CPC being hosted on the DSA website rose again in June 2000 in connection with a heated dispute on the House floor between Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-Calif., and Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and David R. Obey, D- Wis., over the “merits of the F-22 fighter plane.”

When Cunningham stood to defend himself, he threw into his argument the fact the DSA website had a link to the CPC, which DeFazio then led.

In 2000, the relationship between the CPC and DSA was an open secret.

In an Aug. 10, 2000, letter to the editor published in The Kentucky Post, it was reported that then-Democratic Rep. Ken Lucas had received campaign funds from Democratic Reps. Marcy Kaptur, John Lewis, George Miller, Nancy Pelosi and Charles Rangel, “among others on the far-left.” The writer remarked that “those five names stand out because they are all members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus – a group closely aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America.”

The CPC still had not moved to its own website on April 23, 2002. Balint Vazsonyi responded thusly in the Washington Times to the hypothetical question, “‘What?’ I hear you say. ‘Socialists in the Congress of the United States?’”

Dozens, dear reader, dozens. And they make no secret of it. Although of late it has been refurbished and the address altered, they have their own Web site. They call themselves members of the Progressive Caucus, until recently an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America, itself an arm of the Socialist International. The Progressive Caucus may be a separate entity now, but the details of its program, as advertised on the Web site (dsausa.org/pc/pc.caucus.html), are indistinguishable from that of the Socialist International.

To their credit, they make no secret of it. Only the rest of us prefer not to believe it.

In a follow-up article in November 2002, Vazsonyi dug deeper into the continued presence of the CPC on the DSA website. He discussed the issue of constitutionality and the ramifications of the relationship:

The Socialist International carries the torch for Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, V.I. Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and Josef Stalin. Pay no attention to the desperate attempts by socialists to distance themselves from Stalin. For our purposes, it suffices to observe that every single tenet of the Socialist International is the exact opposite of the principles upon which America was founded, and which define the U.S. Constitution.

For our purposes, it suffices also to observe that members of the U.S. Congress are required to furnish an oath whereby they will preserve, protect, and defend said Constitution.

The CPC moved its website in late 2002.

‘Socialists active in Congress’

In October 2009, the DSA newsletter reported that 70 congressional Democrats were active members.

The group also claimed 11 socialists sit on the House Judiciary Committee.

The DSA makes clear its preference for working within the Democratic Party for the change it seeks.

“Many socialists have seen the Democratic Party, since at least the New Deal, as the key political arena in which to consolidate this coalition, because the Democratic Party held the allegiance of our natural allies,” the group states in the “Where we stand” section of its website.

“Through control of the government by the Democratic Party coalition, led by anti-corporate forces, a progressive program regulating the corporations, redistributing income, fostering economic growth and expanding social programs could be realized.”

In addition to a national program of “massive redistribution of income from corporations and the wealthy to wage earners and the poor and the public sector,” the DSA also calls for a breaking down the American-style notions of nationalism and national sovereignty.

“A program of global justice can unite opponents of transnational corporations across national boundaries around a common program to transform existing international institutions and invent new global organizations designed to ensure that wages, working conditions, environmental standards and social rights are ‘leveled up’ worldwide,” the group says on its website. “The basis of cooperation for fighting the transnationals must be forged across borders from its inception. Economic nationalism and other forms of chauvinism will doom any expanded anti-corporate agenda.”

It also states in the group’s mission statement: “A democratic socialist politics for the 21st century must promote an international solidarity dedicated to raising living standards across the globe, rather than ‘leveling down’ in the name of maximizing profits and economic efficiency. Equality, solidarity, and democracy can only be achieved through international political and social cooperation aimed at ensuring that economic institutions benefit all people. Democratic socialists are dedicated to building truly international social movements – of unionists, environmentalists, feminists, and people of color – that together can elevate global justice over brutalizing global competition.”

Communist anthem

While the DSA tries to paint distinctions between its brand of socialism and communism, before scrubbing its website, the site included a song list that included:

“The Internationale,” the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism.
“Red Revolution,” sung to the tune of “Red Robin,” with these lyrics: “When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there’ll be no more lootin’ when we start shootin’ that Wall Street throng.”
“Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?” Lyrics include: “Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We’ll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.”
The DSA is a political action committee and bills itself as the heir to the defunct Socialist Party of America. Its chief organizing objective is to work within the Democratic Party as the primary, but not sole, method of achieving public ownership of private property and the means of production.

“Stress our Democratic Party strategy and electoral work,” explains an internal organizing document obtained by WND. “The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture and help integrate you to the milieu of the young liberals.”

Close working relationship

Demonstrating the close relationship between the DSA and the Progressive Caucus, in October 2010 WND reported the Democratic chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee was caught on tape meeting with DSA leaders to discuss how the group can cooperate to strengthen President Obama and advance their “one-world” plans.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., who has a long history with the DSA, was recorded promoting a “one-world” government while asking the socialist group to organize against the war in Afghanistan and in support of Obama’s policies.

Conyers was a special guest at a two-day convention in Detroit in March 1982 that resulted in the formation of DSA.

Conyers has spoken at numerous DSA events, including at the socialist group’s national dinner in 2008, where he was the keynote.

Conyers was one of 13 founders of Congressional Black Caucus, which long has promoted far-left causes. He is the most prominent lawmaker lobbying to free Mumia Abu-Jamal, the convicted murderer of a Philadelphia police officer. He has advocated on behalf of the Marxist Nicaraguan Sandinista dictatorship and has called for the U.S. to end its sanctions against Fidel Castro’s communist regime. The Democratic Socialists of America released in its newsletter a list of members of the U.S. Congress who are members of the organization:

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs

Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members

Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members

Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)

Democracy is indispensable to socialism. V.I. Lenin

Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx

The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin

PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY OFFERING ‘REVOLUTIONARY MARXISM’ COURSE — AND WAIT UNTIL YOU SEE THE SYLLABUS – WHY?

Portland State University is offering a number of controversial courses this semester, the likes of which include “Revolutionary Marxism: Theory and Practice,“ and ”Art Within Activism” (though students are also welcome to take “Exploring Buffy the Vampire Slayer”).
The “Revolutionary Marxism” course is introduced in what appears to be the syllabus:
The onset of the Arab Spring, revolts in European capitals against austerity, and the emergence of Occupy Wall Street here in the US have made the need for understanding revolutionary political theories [more] urgent than ever.
This course is designed to introduce students to the basic concepts of Marxist thought with an emphasis on the practical applications of Marxist Theory in local political struggle.  We will focus on four major areas throughout the semester, including the Fundamentals of Marxist Theory, Marxism and Oppression, Revolutionary Practice, and The Future of Socialism.  In exploring these four areas of focus, the course will compare and contrast revolutionary Marxism to Stalinism, reformist socialism, leading academic interpretations of Marxism, as well as other radical leftist ideologies. [Emphasis added]
The course’s instructors, Grant Booth and Wael Elasady, are both admitted socialists.  They define the course’s goals as:
1.  Students will learn the fundamentals of Marxist theory
2.  Students will apply a Marxist analysis to current events
3.  Students will apply Marxist theory to local political and community organizing
Moreover, students will seemingly be required to forge a “community connection” with a local community/political organization from a specified list.  Some of the “approved” organizations include: Occupy PSU, Students United for Palestinian Equal Rights, Occupy Portland, Portland Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions Coalition (BDS), Jobs with Justice, and the May Day Coalition.

Jarrett Family worked closely with Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis
by Aaron Klein

Editor’s note: In 2008, WND thoroughly vetted President Obama’s radical background. Many of those original exclusive reports, almost entirely ignored by the mainstream news media, currently are being utilized four years later by some media outlets in the lead up to this year’s presidential election. From now until election day, WND will be presenting our original investigations into Obama and his radical ties with bonus updates. These reports are as important today as they were in 2008. Following is the first in a series of articles aimed at re-vetting Obama.
Was Valerie Jarrett, one of President Obama’s closest advisers, introduced to the president’s political circles by her father-in-law, a communist sympathizer who worked with the radical Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis?
Jarrett’s family background and her initial introduction to Obama may tie her to onetime Obama environmental adviser Van Jones’ radical ideology.
Jarrett’s father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, was an associate of Frank Marshall Davis, the controversial labor movement activist who has been identified as an early influence on Obama.
Vernon Jarrett and Davis worked together in 1940 in a Communist Party-dominated organization, the Citizen’s Committee to Aid Packing House Workers. The group’s own correspondence, previously uncovered by the New Zeal blog, describes its communist influence. Many of its leaders were tied to the Communist Party.
The pair also frequented the SouthSideCommunityArtCenter, which was dominated by communists. In addition, Davis and Vernon Jarrett worked in the late 1940s on the communist-influenced, black-run Chicago Defender newspaper.
In 1948, Jarrett started a radio show, “Negro Newsfront,” and went on to become the Chicago Tribune’s first black syndicated columnist.
A Washington Post obituary of Jarrett notes he “stoked the political embers in Chicago that led to the 1983 election of the city’s first African-American mayor, Harold Washington.”
“Vernon Jarrett was a key influence in Washington’s decision to run for the Chicago mayoralty and remained a key supporter through his four-year tenure,” the newspaper reported.
Obama has hailed Washington’s victory as a motivation for him to move to Chicago from New York. Washington was involved in communist-dominated circles in Chicago.
Vernon Jarrett clearly watched the rise of Obama as an activist. When Obama worked for Project Vote to register black voters with the intent of aiding the senatorial campaign of Carol Moseley Braun, Jones took note. Obama later took over Braun’s Senate seat.
Writing in the Chicago Sun-Times in 1992, Jarrett noted: “Good news! Good news! Project Vote, a collectivity of 10 church-based community organizations dedicated to black voter registration, is off and running. … If Project Vote is to reach its goal of registering 150,000 out of an estimated 400,000 unregistered blacks statewide, ‘it must average 10,000 rather than 7,000 every week,’ says Barack Obama, the program’s executive director.”
Valerie Jarrett married Vernon’s son, William Robert Jarrett, in 1983.
In 1987, she got her start in politics, working for Washington as deputy corporation counsel for finance and development. She was deputy chief of staff for Mayor Richard Daley, during which time she hired Michelle Robinson, then engaged to Obama.
Valerie Jarrett went on to run the finances for Obama’s Senate bid in 2004, the year Vernon Jarrett died.
Currently, Jarrett is touted as one of Obama’s closest advisers.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.
We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?
We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has “loaned” trillions of dollars over the past few years, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of “we the people” who loaned our powers to elected leaders who took an oath to uphold the Constitution.
We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. We have intentionally dumbed-down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why our nation is worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate what they believe without excessive use of the word “like.” Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, and school Boards continue to back mediocrity.
We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic.
The mortgage industry has collapsed, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke — the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x ten.

We are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.
And finally, we have elected a man of who we know very little, the media won’t investigate, and who has not run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. His associations and alliances are with real radicals and everything we are learning about him — drip by unsettling drip — is unsettling if not downright scary.
I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.
This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.
And that is only the beginning.
As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the “savior” was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed. He edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his “brown shirts” would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did — regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand — the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the world. He did it with a compliant media — did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and change. And the people surely got what they voted for.
Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.
Do not forget that Germany was one of the most educated and cultured countries in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust) or I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades. Of course, I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me.
I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff and others laugh or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe and why I believe it.
I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next election.

By Elizabeth Williamson

Newt Gingrich has repeatedly labeled President Barack Obama a “Saul Alinsky radical.”
He raised Mr. Alinsky’s name in his victory speech Saturday night after winning the South Carolina primary. On Sunday morning, Mr. Gingrich asserted on NBC that Mr. Obama draws his political vision “from Saul Alinsky, radical left-wingers and people who don’t like the classical America.”

Which likely raised a question for many Americans: Who is Saul Alinsky and why is he being in­voked to argue there are fundamental flaws in -Mr. Obama’s leadership?
Mr. Alinsky, who died in 1972 at age 63, was a Chicago-born social-movement organizer whose success has been praised by Democrats and Republicans alike. He was grudgingly admired by con­servative hero William F. Buckley Jr., who called him “very close to being an organizational genius.” Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, a Republican, gives copies of Mr. Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals” to tea-party leaders to counteract his teaching.

His work to bring together residents of Chicago’s low-income neighborhoods to agitate for more services from the city in the 1950s and 1960s drew the wrath of Mayor Richard J. Daley, a Democrat.

Mr. Alinsky openly courted controversy and hostile reactions as a way to change society, and urged his followers to do the same. “The organizer dedicated to changing the life of a particular community must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression,” he wrote in one book. “He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act.”

In his book “Reveille for Radicals” he entitled the opening section, “Call Me Rebel.”

Mr. Alinsky didn’t believe in violence; his bomb-throwing was purely verbal. His approach involved interviewing people one by one to identify a common self-interest that could be used to galvanize the group. He had no faith in the political system to effect change for the people it ignored, and believed heavy pressure from outside was the only way to force the wheels of government to turn.

One of Mr. Alinsky’s earliest efforts, in 1939, was a campaign to unite black, white and immigrant workers to force improve­ments in the working conditions in Chicago’s livestock slaughtering and meat-processing plants.
Mr. Gingrich’s labeling of Mi Obama as a “food stamp president” and his effort to associate the president with Mr. Alinsky resonates with a conservative element of the electorate that sees Mr. Obama as pushing radical social change. Economists say the expansion of food stamps during the Obama administration is linked to broader joblessness and congressional moves to expand benefits.

Mr. Obama was hired in 1985 by the Developing Communities Project, an Alinsky network affiliate. After Harvard Law School, he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago and advised community groups. While as a community organizer he was steeped in Mr. Alinsky’s politics, he told the New Republic in 2007 that “Alinsky understated the degree to which people’s hopes and dreams and their ideals and their values were just as important in organizing as people’s self-interest,”

Obama .campaign officials say the president long ago rejected Mr. Alinsky’s confrontational tactics and favors working within the political system to effect change.
Mr. Alinsky encouraged the use of the word “radical” to describe himself. But while his seminal work was titled “Rules for Radicals,” the seldom-cited second part of the title is “A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals.”

Adam Brandon, spokesman for FreedomWorks, which has been organizing tea-party activists and includes Mr. Armey as chairman, says the group gives Mr. Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” to its top leadership members. A shortened guide called “Rules for Patriots” is distributed to its entire network. The Purpose is to counteract the Obama doctrine.

Mr. Brandon called the effort to associate Mr. Obama with Mr. Alinsky “a double-edged sword.” While Mr. Alinsky was an avowed liberal Democrat, “his tactics when it comes to grass-roots rebel organizing are incredibly effective,” Mr. Brandon said.