Politics

Did You Know? Obama Apparently Spoke at a 1996 Event Hosted by a Socialist Group

President Barack Obama has very frequently come under fire for purportedly embracing socialist ideals. While some have called these characterizations unfair, others have continued to maintain that Obama’s ideals dance on a line that very easily earns him such a distinction. Now, an alleged 1996 advertisement from the Hyde Park Herald, a community newspaper in Chicago, touts an appearance by Obama at an event sponsored by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), among other groups.

BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski says that the ad is “a reminder that the President presented himself as much more progressive during his time in Chicago.” Now, it’s important to note that Obama appeared with other professors and experts on the panel and according to the ad, the discussion, entitled, “Employment and Survival in Urban America,“ was centered upon ”economic insecurity.”

Here’s the ad in question:

Flyer Shows Barack Obama Spoke at 1996 Socialist Event

This isn‘t the first time that purported evidence of Obama’s attachment to socialist organizations has emerged. In the past, he has been accused of having ties to the Chicago New Party, a leftist political movement that many on the right — and left — have derided as fringe (the group is no longer operational). This photo was purportedly found on the front page of a New Party News pamphlet back in 1996:

Flyer Shows Barack Obama Spoke at 1996 Socialist Event

In 2008, as Gateway Pundit has noted, Obama’s “Fight the Smears” web site tackled the issue of the New Party and attempted to dismiss any notion that he was an affiliated member:

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

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

Flyer Shows Barack Obama Spoke at 1996 Socialist Event

This particular newspaper blurb doesn’t claim that Obama is a member, but it does seem — at least based on the print — that the politician was welcoming of the New Party’s endorsement. This, in itself, though, doesn’t provide evidence that the president was an actual member of a socialist group. Instead, it shows that there was an affiliation and a relationship of some sort.

Gateway Pundit goes on to share other evidence that is believed to validate that a meaningful relationship existed between Obama and the fringe New Party. But beyond these elements, other comments the president has made over time have created some questions worth asking.

Consider Obama’s call in 2007 for universal healthcare – yet another incident that seemed to add to the narrative that he endorses, or is at least sympathetic to, socialistic ideals.

“The time has come for universal health care in America,” the then-candidate proclaimed at a Families USA conference on health care. ”I am absolutely determined that by the end of the first term of the next president, we should have universal health care in this country.”

None of these elements offer definitive proof of a socialistic mindset, but they do raise questions — questions that will likely re-emerge and continue to swirl during the 2012 presidential campaign.

Comments (102)

1 2 3
  • YoshiFD3S
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:15pm

    My question to everyone is…

    Why the hell has it taken this long for media outlets to pull up this kind of history on Obama??? Why wasn’t this effort made and publicized BEFORE he was elected in the first place???

    Report Post » YoshiFD3S  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:28pm

      Most of the media is run and populated by socialists who are themselves elitists.The media and academia for the most part has been ideologically captured by this Marxist ideology, though they won’t use that term. The real war here is not left and right. It is ideology, COLLECTIVISM, the masses have been scammed into surrendering their liberty under the false premise of a utopia, when really the surrender of liberty empowers the political, economic and intellectual elites.

      It is liberty and tyranny, up and down, the elitists (wealth parasites) vs the common man (wealth producers).

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • teddie888
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:32pm

      The stuff that was published was bad enough but nobody wanted to believe it. Heck, who in their sane mind votes for anyone with a Muslim name for our country after 9/11 ?
      The everyone saw w/ their own eyes the campaign plane which for the 1st time in history didn‘t have an American flag on it’s tail.
      There were many many things that were right there in front, but no one cared

      Report Post »  
    • Wayner
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:32pm

      Well Yoshifd3s.. Probably for the same reason that the only place you’re going to see it, is here.. It surely won’t be on CBS, NBC or ABC… Nor the New York Times.

      Report Post »  
    • Anonymous T. Irrelevant
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:25pm

      Just another reminder that journalism died in 2008. If the media had done it’s job and vetted this clown, he would NOT have been elected.

      Report Post » Anonymous T. Irrelevant  
    • Detroit paperboy
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:54pm

      Omg, he’s a socialist ??? Wow.

      Report Post »  
    • StrongWesternbabeluvinherWesternMAN
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 2:49am

      GOOD GOLLY MISS MOLLY……..Sean Hannity was screaming this stuff from the ‘roof tops’….before this man was elected!!! Why do you think the rest of have been talking this talk and walking this walk, losing friends and family, and have ulcers since ‘this man was elected’!!! Where were the rest of you????????

      Report Post »  
    • db321
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 8:26am

      Yoshifd – I don’t know why it has taken the Media so long – maybe we should keep tuning into NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC and CNN – until they expose him. I‘m sure that Saddam’s News Stations always told the truth about Saddam.

      Or better yet, maybe we should vote for Obama again and that way we will all find out if he really plans to turn America into a Marxist Communist Dictatorship. I wish I could help you here, but I’m really not one to get my news from his Propaganda channels.

      Report Post » db321  
  • steveh931
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:13pm

    In 1964 Ronald Reagan gave a speech called “A Time for Choosing”.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBswFfh6AY

    Report Post » steveh931  
  • term limits for congress
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:56am

    Democrat : Socialist

    Report Post »  
  • 65Mustang
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:54am

    There is absolutely nothing about the POS, Obama that surprises me !!!!!

    Report Post »  
    • cosette
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:29pm

      @65 MUSTANG…(Love that car)…I would not be surprised if they discovered a dismembered body in Obozos’ sock drawer. And I am quite sure the media would dismiss the discovery. There is nothing which is beneath him and his minions.They are contemptible, vile and dangerous and if left unchecked will be the ruination of this country. God help us.

      Report Post »  
  • Sirfoldallot
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:43am

    Duhhhhhhh !!!!!!!

    Report Post » Sirfoldallot  
    • HKS
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:46am

      That’s what socialist do.

      Report Post » HKS  
    • Bum thrower
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:18pm

      They LIE; they rail against those evil ‘capitolists’ and laud the compassion of government……..I wanna throw up!!!

      Vote ALL Democrats out in 2012!!! Republicans need to start calling them liberals, socialists, and anti-American ………’cause that is what they are……..

      Report Post »  
  • BoyScout_Mom
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:33am

    Boss and Obama, however, had a starkly different view. They believed that the economic stresses of the Carter years meant revolution was still imminent. The election of Reagan was simply a minor set-back in terms of the coming revolution. As I recall, Obama repeatedly used the phrase “When the revolution comes….” In my mind, I remember thinking that Obama was blindly sticking to the simple Marxist theory that had characterized my own views while I was an undergraduate at Occidental College. “There’s going to be a revolution,” Obama said, “we need to be organized and grow the movement.” In Obama’s view, our role must be to educate others so that we might usher in more quickly this inevitable revolution.

    I know this may be implausible to some readers, but I distinctly remember Obama surprising me by bringing up Frantz Fanon and colonialism. He impressed me with his knowledge of these two topics, topics which were not among my strong points — or of overwhelming concern to me. Boss and Obama seemed to think their ideological purity was a persuasive argument in predicting that a coming revolution would end capitalism. While I felt I was doing them a favor by providing them with the latest research, I saw I was in danger of being cast as a reactionary who did not grasp the nuances of international Marxist theory.

    Report Post » BoyScout_Mom  
  • Lee Kennedy
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:08am

    Really?

    Report Post » Lee Kennedy  
  • Lee Kennedy
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:08am

    “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” —Winston Churchill

    Sign Up Today and Help Restore America to “We The People”
    http://faithfamilyfreedom.com/

    Report Post » Lee Kennedy  
  • yanki161
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:06am

    As Gilbert Godfried has said – I could DIE from not surprised!

    Report Post » yanki161  
  • leekennedyfff
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:05am

    Not really surprising now is it? “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” —Winston Churchill

    http://faithfamilyfreedom.com/

    Report Post » leekennedyfff  
  • REPUB1
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:00am

    well NO **** DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Report Post »  
  • thegreatcarnac
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:57am

    No surprise. Obama is a socialist at best….but probably a full fledged commie. He is the ‘manchurian candidate’ and is trying to bring about a coup in this nation. The article said he was a democrat all of his life…, big deal. Nowadays…it is a minor step from being a democrat to being a socialist.

    Report Post »  
  • Meyvn
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:55am

    No. I’m astonished.

    Report Post » Meyvn  
  • huey6367
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:54am

    Obama is not a socialist. He is a space alien. And a racist space alien at that. Thus, making him ineligible to be President. Send him back to his own planet!! He is obviously not from this one.

    Report Post »  
  • Publius Duo
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:47am

    I think our dear president is involved in something even more sinister. Reasearch “Mungiki”.
    Sounds familiar, huh?

    Report Post » Publius Duo  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:21am

      Publius Duo:
      I admire your dogged pursuit of something, anything, to hold over Obama. I really do. But if you had actually carefully researched the Mungiki movement, you would know that it consists of members of the Kikuyu tribe. Obama’s family stems from the Luo, who have actually been victims of Mungiki violence. Or do you think “Kenyan is Kenyan,“ just as ”black is black,” because they all look alike to you?

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Publius Duo
      Posted on June 6, 2012 at 10:29am

      1st of all he’s half white. That being said black, white, purple, green, color is irrelevant. Your typical race baiting comments are appauling and in insult to your arguement. Not to mention that I have many (black) friends as well as (black) relatives. It’s the mindset, or core values of this president that are suspect. Anti-colonial, socialist, anti-constitutional, etc. Lose the race baiting and you might actually have a viable arguement. No, not all blacks look alike! Nor do they all think alike. Unfortunately our dear POTUS, thinks like many tin-pot dictators from the country of his roots. Read his book Dreams from my Father. I have. “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.” Enough said. You are the company you keep. One needs to choose their friends carefully. Guilt by association.

      Report Post » Publius Duo  
  • Gita
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:42am

    Of course Oblahbla is a socialist and much more even communist. He is going after the catholic church to shut the church down as all communist countries did in the past. He cannot be as blatant about it because we know the history of communist countries needing to remove the catholic church so he is trying to shut the church down through the back door. The new movie coming out “For Greater Glory” is timely by the hand of God. Please see this movie!

    Report Post » Gita  
    • REPUB1
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:03am

      get rid of the Harlot church ( catholic ) i will back him on that and only that

      Report Post »  
  • Richard_Cranium
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:41am

    “Right-wing hatchet man and conspiracy theorist, Stanley Kurtz is pushing a new crackpot smear against Barack falsely claiming he was a member of something called the New Party. But the truth is Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party”….

    So, that means nothing. Ron Paul is a member of the Republican party but he obviously is a Libertarian.

    Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:12am

      The pattern with Obama is clear now for anyone that wants to look at it….he’s anything he believes he needs to be for any voting bloc he needs at the time. If it‘s Chicago he has to be in Rev Wright’s racist church and appearing at socialist party functions..this is why in those days he was for homosexual marriage, against the troops (“just airraiding villages and killing civilians”), “free stuff” for everyone, etc. But when he ran for President all of a sudden he’s a Christian, against homosexual marriage and a moderate who wants to “fight the good war”, a fiscal hawk that will balance the budget in his first term…ad nauseum. It doesnt’ get slimier than Barack Obama. Sure..underneath it all he’s a socialist..but that still comes back to being all about him.

      Report Post »  
  • moussiagilda
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:37am

    Of course he did. He did.

    You either shed light or you bury yourself in darkness.

    Report Post »  
  • Individualism
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:35am

    hes not a socialist, under his presidency, the lower and middle class have lost money while the rich keep getting richer just like under Bush as well because of Illuminati.

    Report Post » Individualism  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:07am

      That‘s because he’s inept, it hasnt’ been by design.

      Report Post »  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:26am

      This is because Marxism is a strategy for power, the common belief that Marxism/socialism is egalitarianism is a grand lie. The goal of imposing Socialism is really to entrench wealth and power with the political and economic elites and their cohorts.

      Marxism and its derivatives are an ideology and lies, deception and manipulation.

      Trading individual liberty for State power (enslavement) is the con. The sales pitch is a utopian “equality”, the reality is “sameness”. The masses are made the same while the elites gain wealth and power, that is real MARXISM. There elites know this, the useful idiots are fooled by it and promote their own enslavement and demise.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt58gg1DQGk

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:31pm

      Sue Dohnim:

      “The goal of imposing Socialism is really to entrench wealth and power with the political and economic elites and their cohorts.”

      Really? Members of the pre-1917 property-owning classes in Russia–if any are still alive–or the hundreds of thousands of landowners and business people who fled Cuba after 1959, would be surprised to learn this!

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 1:16pm

      @LLOYD DRAKO

      Yes really, any communist society has its elites that benefit from the State apparatus which redistributes wealth to its members and cohorts.

      Fidel is worth what 50 million…

      This is isn’t rocket science, it is gangsterism via the State. Capone, Alinsky.. OBAMA

      Those that get control of the State, share the bounty.. Socialism is a means to obtain control..

      This is not inconsistent with your assertion.

      Marxism is “GANGSTERISM” and gangs or alliances with shift and reform, even conflict with and destroy each other. All at for one purpose, control.

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 1:43pm

      Sue, there has not been a society since the stone age that has not had elites. That is as it should be.
      But your comment suggested that the purpose of people who call themselves socialists is to entrench, if not to augment, current elites in their existing wealth and power. That is not the case.

      Most socialists of whatever ilk–Christian, utopian, Marxist (whether Communist or not) in their hearts have believed they were fighting to empower the powerless, and to take wealth away from people who gained it unfairly.

      Of course, what socialists actually DO once in power is another matter. They in turn become an entrenched elite, and sometimes even contrive to perpetuate their elite status into successor capitalist or quasi-capitalist systems, as has happened in Russia and may be happening in China.

      Obama’s enemies often seem confused as to what exactly he stands for, except that they know they’re agin it. He talks about making the rich pay their fair share, whatever that means, but at the same time consorts with them and, as we’ve recently been reminded, takes money from Wall Street “fat cats.” So is he elite or anti-elite? An elitist anti-elitist?

      I think he is a calculating politician, of non-elite origins but with plenty of elite associations,and not at all the reincarnation of Lenin.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 2:21pm

      @LLOYD DRAKO

      This is a complex paradigm, let me be clear..

      Socialism and its derivatives benefit the elites, all democracies and societies move toward socialism. There are those who accept socialism in the “idealistic” sense, perhaps the majority. IMO they are dupes unknowingly perpetuating socialism, though they may have noble intentions. Socialism comes at the expense of the individual. The American context was the exception in history, restricting Gov and giving the individual power as never before. NOW, that has been completely subverted…

      The Gov instead of protecting society from plunder has engaged in plunder. for itself, its supporters, cohorts and the elites that have undue influence. Socialism comes at the expense of individual liberty.. and Marxism is the strategy to achieve power over the individual.

      Sure, there are always elites, and not all elites plunder, but most elites believe that they can construct and direct society better than the individual making decisions for themselves. That power over others encourages plunder.

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 2:40pm

      @LLOYD DRAKO

      Obama is an elitist, an intellectual one, not spawned from wealth but from Marxist ideology..

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
  • Apple Bite
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:33am

    The more you expose of this Liar in office, the more you shed light on his incompetence and true nature.

    Report Post » Apple Bite  
    • JRook
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:44am

      “evidence of Obama’s attachment to socialist organizations has emerged” Your right such a statement is an exaggeration at best and more like a lie. The event was also sponsored by the U of Chicago Democrats. I know this is a foreign concept but the founding fathers and particularly Jefferson were particularly inspired by THE SOCIAL CONTRACT OR PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL RIGHT by Jean Jacques Rousseau more so than the bible, the current BS narrative from the right. Sounds like the event was more of an intellectual discussion which of course would be objectionable to those who value ideology over thought.

      Report Post »  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:58am

      @JROOK

      I do agree with you, that event in isolated context does not reveal Obamas Socialist ideology.

      The entire context and preponderance of information about Obama and his history clearly shows his (Western) Marxist ideology…

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • BoyScout_Mom
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:32am

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/even_republicans_rejected_info_about_obamas_past.html

      “The Obama I knew was nothing like the lifelong pragmatic centrist that he was pretending to be in the 2008 presidential campaign. When I talked politics with the young Obama, he expressed a profound commitment to bringing about a socialist economic system in the U.S. — completely divorced from the profit motive — which would occur, in his lifetime, through a potentially violent, Communist-style revolution. In this context, I saw my report on young Obama as a key piece of evidence suggesting a profound continuity in his belief system.”

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/02/meeting_young_obama.html

      My graduate studies that fall had tempered my earlier Marxism with a more realistic perspective. I thought a revolution was not in the cards anymore. There was no inevitability, in my mind, to the old idea that the proletariat would rise up and overthrow the ruling classes. Now, the idea that we could entirely eliminate the profit motive from an advanced industrialized economy seemed like a childhood fantasy. The future, I now thought, would belong to nations with mixed economic systems — like those in Europe — where there was government planning of the economy combined with a greater effort to produce a more equitable distribution of wealth. It made more sense to me to focus on elections rather than on preparing for a coming revolution.”

      Report Post » BoyScout_Mom  
  • Baddoggy
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:29am

    I am shocked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ok I jest….

    Report Post » Baddoggy  
  • lukerw
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:27am

    Ah… yes… the ‘Kenyan Kandidate’!

    Report Post » lukerw  
  • Sue Dohnim
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:25am

    “Listen to this interview with Dr. John Drew, a conservative professor of political science who was a Communist in his youth and founder of the Marxist Student Association at Occidental College:

    Interview by Jeff Kuhner – Dr. Drew describes Obama’s total dedication to Communist revolution in America, beginning with his youthful indoctrination in Hawaii by the well-known member of the Communist Party of America (CPUSA) Frank Marshall Davis, and continuing through his college years, as personally witnessed by Dr. Drew based on his close personal contact with Obama at Occidental College.”

    audio
    http://archive.org/details/BarackObamasTotalDedicationToMarxism-OccidentalsDr.JohnDrew

    Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:36am

      Thanks for that link. I still say that birds of a feather flock together. It is as simple as that.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:42am

      Obama is a Marxist, not the Stalin type, A western Marxist from the Antonio Gramscii ideological line..

      The obama ideological map..

      bit.ly/N7JJR

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Gita
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:52am

      My mother always said “show me your friends and I’ll show you what you are”. And oblahblah is still hanging out with marxists guess my mother was right.

      Report Post » Gita  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:53am

      OBAMA MARXIST IDEOLOGICAL MAP>>>

      The obama ideological map.. see here get this map and share it…. IMPORTANT

      >>>> bit.ly/N7JJR <<<<

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:56pm

      Obama went to Occidental and Columbia in the late 1970s-early 1980s. He would have to have been brain-dead not to get some exposure to “Western” Marxism at such prestigious places at that time. Old-school Marxism with its fixation on the working classes was pretty much played out by then, and leftists everywhere were looking for surrogates–students, women, racial minorities–to fill the role. Obama with his desperate search for an identity settled on “black.” But it’s sheer fantasy to call him a “Gramscian” or anything of the sort. He neither talks the talk nor walks the walk.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 1:58pm

      @LLOYD DRAKO

      Are you kidding.. either you are ignorant or intellectually dishonest, I suspect the latter..but

      Gramsci is the genesis of Western Marxism, through the Marxist Frankfurt School to the elite halls of US Academia. The strategy is to subvert Western culture by stealth, to infiltrate all the institutions and through marxist critical theory destroy the dominant Western hegemony. It is ideological demoralization from within to reconstruct it via elitist dictate. It is basically “brainwashing” a society by infiltrating its cultural agents, academic, entertainment, governmental and media. This is Obamas ideological history, like all modern Western Marxists or The New Left. Old school Marxist failed as they controlled society physically with a gun, Gramsci was critical of Marx and figured out that you must control individuals.. “reality” “perception” “culture” “history” “education” “thinking”..

      IMO, Gramsci is far more influential and dangerous than Marx. He laid out the “REVOLUTION”, a revolution of the mind.

      A brief explanation. this comment section is a poor medium to really explore this stuff..

      http://frankfurtschool.us/history.htm

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:28pm

      @Sue Dohnim: “Gramsci was critical of Marx and figured out that you must control individuals. .“reality” “perception” “culture” “history” “education” “thinking”..

      I think we’d both agree that Gramsci was right! Not to be too provocative here, because I see you really do want an argument and not just name-calling, but Gramsci stripped of his Marxism was advancing a strategy for the attainment of power. (Marxism, BTW, is an analysis of capitalist dynamics, not a political strategy as such.) The Gramscian strategy–of controlling perceptions, setting the terms of the debate, redefining the meaning of words (e.g., “liberal”), embarking on a “long march through the institutions,” is exactly what the right in America has been doing quite successfully for nearly 40 years. Similarly, a radical who was not a Marxist, namely the infamous Saul Alinsky, pioneered tactics and strategies that have been used successfully to mobilize such movements as the Tea Party, generating activism amng previously passive elements of society.

      I would not trust Obama or anyone else with total power, but nothing he has done or said suggests that that is what he wants, or that he is anywhere near attaining it. I completely disagree that most of the left is “utopian.” I think that the idea of total, absolute individual liberty with a government whose sole purpose is to protect a free market, is at least as utopian as the dream of a hopey-changey socialist order in which

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:35pm

      all share equally and in which, magically, there are no elites.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 4:52pm

      @LLOYD DRAKO

      Marxism has many definitions depending on the context, Alinsky was a Marxist and you seem intent on distracting the issue to knock the Tea Party and the right. But the facts are, Obama is a Marxist, he was born into Marxism, he had a Marxist mentor, he was attracted to Marxist Professors, he was trained by a Marxist. His policies and rhetoric are Marxist. Specifically, Gramscian Western Marxism and to deny this is juvenile,, What may be in dispute are his motives,, is he a pure idealist or using it for purely power, probably both, first idealism then power. But true Marxists are Narcissists and often Sociopaths, they must lie, deceive and manipulate to achieve their goal of imposing by coercion their ideology onto others. Ends justifies the means…

      I just don’t know why those that have the ability to actually understand this stuff still choose to remain in denial and continue to push Tyranny and enslavement of themselves, their children and future citizens.

      This is not a left right issue, it is a liberty vs tyranny issue.. the state vs the individual. The terms are malleable but the concept is simple.

      Which is truly empowered.. in a civil society

      The individual (all) or the State (a small coalition of individuals)

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 5:03pm

      @LLOYD DRAKO
      “I think that the idea of total, absolute individual liberty with a government whose sole purpose is to protect a free market, is at least as utopian as the dream of a hopey-changey socialist”

      ————–

      This is your straw-man fallacy,,,

      The Government should protect the individual and property from plunder.. but both right and left have become the plunderer.. True Conservatism advocates for the individual while the Republican Party are mostly Socialist light….

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:34pm

      @Sue Dohnim:
      I’m not knocking the Tea Party;I’m simply pointing out that some of its sponsors–Dick Armey, for instance–very openly admitted that elements of its strategy derived from Alinsky.
      Alinsky was not a Marxist. He rejected any socialist and, especially, communist ties. Toward the end of his life, he began to say that even the middle classes were susceptible to organization and empowerment along the lines of his strategy and techniques.
      I remain unpersuaded that Obama is any sort of Marxist, unless by “Marxist” you mean someone who carelessly uses terms like “social justice.” His parents were squishy leftists of a sort, but not Marxists. I’m not sure who you mean by his “Marxist mentor”–perhaps Frank Marshall Davis? Very thin stuff on which to hang his entire career. As for Marxist professors, anyone who’s been to college has had a few of those! How easy it is to throw around terms like “narcissist” and “sociopath!” I admit Obama seems a bit smug and self-centered at times, but I would like to know why you call him a sociopath? Because he has behaved like a politician, often evasively and deceptively? Name me a politician who hasn’t done those things; they’re part of the job description.
      True conservatism does not advocate solely for the individual. True conservatism advocates for caution, tradition, and customary familial, social and community ties, things that the untrammeled free market destroys. Today’s GOP is neither socialist nor truly c

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:46pm

      (c)onservative.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
  • tobywil2
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:22am

    If Obama’s teleprompter malfunctioned and flashed the TRUTH and Obama chocked on that truth, could the HEIMLICH MANEUVER be applied in time to avoid Biden becoming President? http://commonsense21c.com/

    Report Post » tobywil2  
  • MBA
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:21am

    And that is supposed to surprise us? obamy is so unAmerican it’s only a matter of time until this country is owned by China and kenya. Oh wait, we already are. Well there you have it. Impeach now, stop the uncontrolled spending.

    Report Post »  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love