UPDATES: Supreme Court to Determine Legality of Berg v. Obama (see below)
Philip J. Berg announced today that the Supreme Court has "set dates" by which Obama and the DNC must respond to the Writ of Certiorari — on or before December 1, 2008.
Today, the blogosphere erupted with news about the lawsuit filed by Philip J. Berg, which compelled Obama to produce his original, long-form Hawaiian birth certificate to prove his elegibility to become President of the United States. A press release on the ObamaCrimes.com website states:
[Philip J. Berg] ... filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.
Mr. Berg remarked today, "I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama's response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States."
The NEIN Blog offers further explanation of Mr. Berg's announcement:
A review of that docket and the Rule 10 of the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that Justice Souter's granting of a review on the Writ of Certiorari is not a right entitled to citizen Phil Berg, but rather is a matter of judcial discretion based upon a compelling reasons. That compelling reason is the Constitutional requirement that "No person except a natural born citizen ... shall be eligible to the office of President..."
What this means is that on or before 1 DECEMBER 2008 Barack Hussein Obama II must respond to the writ of certiorari, and since the Berg v Obama case hinged primarily on the question of Obama's place of birth, it is almost inconceivable that Barack Obama will thumb his nose at the Justices of the Supreme Court and he is absolutely compelled to provide a vault copy his original birth certificate.
Another very salient fact to consider at this time is that, despite all of the pronouncements of the print and broadcast media, Barack Obama is not yet the President-elect of the United States. Barack Obama can only become the President-elect after the Electoral College convenes on 15 DECEMBER 2008 in their respective state capitals around the nation and casts their votes to elect the President and the Vice President. As you can see this election day occurs two weeks after the required response to the Supreme Court granted Writ of Certiorari.
While the mainstream media has chattered on endlessly about the very important talk of what kind of dog Obama's daughters will be getting and whether Michelle Obama should have that worn "that" dress, there's been little if no talk about Obama's questionable campaign donations, potential voter fraud in key states like Ohio and Florida, Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko — and, of course, nothing about the lingering issue of his proof of citizenship.
We will watch and wait and hope for "change."
**************
UPDATE 11/11/2008
This post has been amended to reflect updates on ObamaCrimes.com — U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO BERG'S WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS — and The NEIN Blog.
From ObamaCrimes.com, 11/10/2008
Mr. Berg has been receiving phone calls today asking for a copy of "the order from the Supreme Court requiring that Obama produce his citizenship documentation."
Mr. Berg has not received notification of any such order or anything similar to it, nor is it posted on the Supreme Court website.
From The NEIN Blog:
What this means is that on or before 1 DECEMBER 2008 Judge Surrick, who presides over the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, must respond to the Writ of Certiorari (sur-shee-uh-rare-eye) by providing to SCOTUS Justice Souter all documents and court proceedings in the case of Berg v. Obama. The crux of the matter here is that Obama (et al.) filed only a motion to dismiss on the grounds on Phil Berg's "lack of standing" to file the lawsuit. No information countering Berg's allegations or challenges to Obama's status as a natural born citizen were addressed. Judge Surrick agreed with the Obama motion and dismissed the case due to Berg's "lack of standing." Justice Souter will most certainly see the specific challenge to Obama's eligibilty pursuant to the Constitutional requirement for president and subsequently may then issue an order for Obama (et al.) to submit docmentation proving his natural born citizenship status to Judge Surrick, or to provide them directly to the SCOTUS.
Blogger commonsenselogic points out the following statement from the video:
"Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six-times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism, the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program."
Barack Obama and Joe Biden want to put your tax dollars—billions of them (about 875 billion, to be exact)—to work for the world. A grand and noble idea, you probably think, but think again about every working American, working to take care of the entire world. Ever feel like the weight of the world is on your shoulders? Perhaps Obama needs to be reminded of "teach a man to fish ..." But why bother when you can just keep taxing those rich, greedy Americans. (Could you pass the caviar, Michelle? And by the way, I, too, am down with J. Crew bargains—how did you ever make People's and Vanity Fair's Best Dressed on such a modest budget?)
Cliff Kinkaid, of Accuracy in Media, wrote this in his February 12 article on Obama's "Global Tax" initiative:
A nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act," sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.
Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.
Now on the home stretch of this election campaign, we, on the right of center (and on dead center), have watched as so many unexpectedly stepped into the shadow of a would-be leader—a premature and uncertain legend—who, like the Pied Piper, stands ready to lead them away to some unknown place. They've placed their unwavering trust in him. They are mortgaging their children's lives on his promises. They follow him with blind faith against logic and reason, ignoring unanswered questions and failing to pose questions of their own.
But this is not a first in history, and many wiser than we have pointed out that history always repeats itself—if we allow it. Americans though are immune to such things, or so we like to think. We wax poetically of rocket's red glare and bombs bursting in air, finding great pride in the battles of our forefathers, but we know little about what that means. After 9/11, our hearts reached out collectively to pick up the pieces, and several generations were given an idea of what war looks like up close—too close—for the first time.
When my daughter was in fifth grade, she was asked to create a virtual society on paper. She was told she could choose any type of government, any type of economy, any number of races of people to live there and all the very specifics of society. The first task was to learn about the possibilities (note: this was not a project of the "standard" curriculum). So, I helped her research and weigh the pros and cons. I tried not to inject bias, but I did make note of the failings of certain ideologies. (Being an American who enjoys freedom of speech, possibility and opportunity, I am obviously somewhat biased.) Ultimately, she chose democracy and capitalism for reasons of fairness and freedom—the idea of a dictator did not sit well with her, and she did not choose herself as a leader. For the president of her fledging society, she chose a kid from her class—she felt, in fairness, she was not the best choice for that job. I was touched by her honesty and ability to think through the qualifications such a leader would need. She described this certain boy as very fair, always willing to help, honest, reliable, funny and ready to stick up for people: He could always find common ground, but she felt he would never try to dictate to others. The assignment was not graded or judged. It was simply a lesson in thinking—an opportunity to look at the world. It was a lesson that many Americans will never learn. Many of us choose to gamble with the casting of our vote, pulling the lever and hoping for the best.
That virtual world, I'm sure, is thriving today, but I'm not sure America's fate is as safe. Many Americans have failed to take the time, as my daughter did, to understand that character in a leader matters. Many of us are clueless about history, geography and varying forms of government and ideology that exist—and no longer exist—around the world.
Recently Barack Obama has been compared to Karl Marx, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez—socialism and communism. It's been noted that his economic plans and ideas about "spreading the wealth" are socialist. He was, in fact, a member of the socialist New Party in Chicago, but now he claims he is not a socialist. He was named by the National Journal as the most liberal member of the Senate—his "composite liberal score" in 2007 was 95.5. The not so gradual incline from 82.5 in 2005 and 86.0 in 2006 indicates that over time Mr. Obama continues to move further and further to left—radically to the left. The National Journal provides a list of votes that were weighed:
NO -- Define a fetus as an "unborn child." August 2. (49-50) L-3
YES -- Make temporary guest workers eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit. June 6. (57-40) L-3
NO -- Make English the official language of the United States. June 6. (64-33) C-2
YES -- Limit debate on a measure to permit labor union organizers to bypass secret-ballot requirements if a majority of eligible workers sign a union card. June 26. (51-48; 60 votes required to invoke cloture) C-3
YES -- Limit debate on a bill raising the federal minimum wage without providing offsetting tax relief for businesses. January 24. (54-43; 60 votes required to invoke cloture) C-3
YES -- Expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program by increasing taxes of those earning more than $1 million. August 1. (36-60) C-2
YES -- Raise the tax rate on income over $1 million and use the revenue to increase funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. March 22. (38-58) C-2
YES -- Require U.S. troops to begin withdrawing from Iraq within four months. March 15. (48-50; 60 votes required because of a unanimous consent agreement) C-3
YES -- Limit debate on a proposal to express the sense of Congress to disagree with the president's troop increase in Iraq. February 17. (56-34; 60 votes required to invoke cloture) C-3
[...] Q: How often did Obama vote the liberal position in 2007? Green: He participated in 66 of the 99 votes used for the ratings. He voted the liberal position 65 times. [National Journal Editor Charles Green]
What does this mean for Americans? Do Obama's supporters understand the implications of electing a president who's policies favor an extreme shift from where we are as a country? Is this good change?
If we look to history—and to those who have experienced a similar change—we have the answer. It's time for education, America. It's time to think. It's time for change, because in America, it's always time for change. We are always evolving, growing and improving. Barack Obama is not change—you are the change that we need.
Think, America.
*************
Che Guevara, Castro's right hand man—a Marxist, atheist, socialist, communist: A flag with this man's picture was hanging on the wall in an Obama campaign office in Houston, Texas. Notice the star on Che Guevara's hat—it's a symbol of the Cuban flag and represents socialism and communism. Guess who else wore this symbol recently:
China's Takeover by Communism
Socialism Destroyed Rome / What is Capitalism?
Marx and the Communist Manifesto -- Your Capital
1959: Mike Wallace interviews Ayn Rand, author of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged
The wind is blowing only one way at Chicago Tribune.
With now less than two weeks before election day, the liberal media have apparently gotten a little wind up their skirts (or pants, as it were). The ounce of integrity we thought they may have left was carried away on the winds of change. "The One" is breathing it all in—another intoxicating breath of fresh air for the senator, who can seemingly head forward in full sprint at all times while those who drive in for a tackle are effortlessly thwarted. To jump sports analogies, the media are always there to set the pick.
The Chicago Tribune has come out to denounce rumors that Barack Obama is a socialist, citing several sources who seem to find the notion laughable. Certainly Chicagoans know best about the one who has emerged from their midst, so we are expected to disregard all other facts—known truths and blatantly obvious clues—and get in line behind the man with the mouth. But the Chicago Tribune fails to question whether Obama is a communist. And why would they, as they might actually hit the target.
We've seen over and over again on forums liberals arguing "you have no idea what socialism is," "Obama is not a Marxist," "no, he's a neo-Marxist," "he is not a communist" (usually followed by "you're a racist"). Maybe they're right about his not falling into any of these categories, because to say that he is one or another is not accurate—he is all of the above. The ideologies and philosophies are all stepping stones in the Communist manifesto.
We can establish that Obama's views run parallel not only with socialism but with the goals of the Communist Party USA (and likewise the Communist manifesto embraced by Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground). Contrary to all sources cited in the Tribune's article, Obama's roots—from his liberal mother to Kenyan activist father to his early mentor Frank Marshall Davis—can be traced to one singular definition: communism. And whether that goes hand-in-hand with socialism is not a question but merely a distraction.
Obama reveals, in his own words (or as we are to assume are his words, in Dreams from My Father), his closeness to Frank Marshall Davis, who he turns to for counsel. The Canada Free Press notes:
What about Frank Marshall Davis’s role as a mentor to the young Obama? This is one of the assertions that Conybeare’s media council disputes. ... Merriam-Webster defines “mentor” as “a trusted counselor or guide.” Was Frank a “trusted counselor or guide” to Obama? And what “vision” did Davis give to the young Obama? Consider these examples from Obama’s 1995 book, Dreams from My Father:
- Obama’s grandmother (Toot) and Gramps have an argument over whether Gramps should give Toot a ride to work after she had been threatened at a bus stop by a black panhandler. Obama looks to Frank to sort it out in his mind. (p. 89-91) -When Toot is having difficulty convincing the drug-abusing young Obama to apply for college, it is again Frank who is able to convince Obama that college is necessary. (p. 96-98) - Frank delivers to the young Obama the one key lesson which radicals have sought to inculcate in the mind of every black person whether under slavery, segregation or civil rights: “…you may be a well-trained, well-paid nigger, but you’re a nigger just the same.” (p. 97)
Gerald Horne published, in March, the text of a speech delivered at the reception of the Communist Party USA at the Tamiment Library at New York University, which references Obama's close tie to Frank Marshall Davis:
When these sources are explored, I think scholars of the future will be struck by, for example, the response in Honolulu when tens of thousands of workers went on strike when labor and CP leaders were convicted of Smith Act violations in 1953 – a response totally unlike the response on the mainland. Of course 98% of these workers were of Asian-Pacific ancestry, which suggests that scholars have also been derelict in analyzing why these workers were less anti-communist than their Euro-American counterparts. In any case, deploring these convictions in Hawaii was an African-American poet and journalist by the name of Frank Marshall Davis, who was certainly in the orbit of the CP – if not a member – and who was born in Kansas and spent a good deal of his adult life in Chicago, before decamping to Honolulu in 1948 at the suggestion of his good friend Paul Robeson.
Eventually, he befriended another family – a Euro-American family – that had migrated to Honolulu from Kansas and a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from Kenya East Africa who goes by the name of Barack Obama, who retracing the steps of Davis eventually decamped to Chicago. In his best selling memoir ‘Dreams of my Father’, the author speaks warmly of an older black poet, he identifies simply as "Frank" as being a decisive influence in helping him to find his present identity as an African-American, a people who have been the least anticommunist and the most left-leaning of any constituency in this nation – though you would never know it from reading so-called left journals of opinion. At some point in the future, a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack’s memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis’ equally affecting memoir, "Living the Blues" and when that day comes, I’m sure a future student will not only examine critically the Frankenstein monsters that US imperialism created in order to subdue Communist parties but will also be moved to come to this historic and wonderful archive in order to gain insight on what has befallen this complex and intriguing planet on which we reside.
The only strategy capable of defeating the ultra-right is the widest possible unity of all the class and social forces whose interests run counter to those of the most reactionary section of the transnationals. Such an all-inclusive coalition would need to be led by labor and the working class in close alliance with the nationally and racially oppressed, women, and youth. It should include seniors, family farmers, the LGBT community, professionals and the self-employed, small business owners, and the disabled—everyone except the most reactionary section of transnational capital. This unity will include an ever-growing Left-Center political coalition that includes the Democratic Party, left and progressive independents who recognize the danger the ultra-right poses, and all social movements on the major issues of our day. This all-people’s front should strive to, and be able to, attract many who voted Republican in the past.
The struggle against the ultra-right, against the most reactionary sector of the transnationals, and for achieving a defeat of its political power is of great significance. However, such a defeat alone will not end the ultra-right danger. There will still be the danger that the most extreme reactionaries, militarists, and racists in our country will seek to impose fascism—an open terrorist dictatorship of big capital. Only the replacement of capitalism—which gives birth to these political trends—by socialism can finally do away with the ultra-right threat.
So, get rid of Republicans, conservatives and capitalism, and roll out socialism. Seems pretty clear. Defines the current force in place behind Obama: Destroy Bush and destroy McCain and all Republicans through association to Bush.
How does the Communist Party USA achieve this?
Grassroots organizing around a program for working people’s needs is key to shift the balance of forces to the left. Building a multiracial, multinational movement and expanding union organization and other movements into the South and rural areas are crucial to overcoming the racism and bigotry utilized by the ultra-right.
The labor movement has made significant shifts in its organization and outlook, and now leads many coalitions for progress and change, and leads defensive struggles against the attacks of the corporations and the ultra-right. Labor’s intensified participation in electoral struggles has resulted in the election of thousands of union members to office, the creation and development of labor’s own independent political apparatus, and better communication with, education of, and mobilization of union membership. Increased efforts to organize workers, to build relationships with allies, and to fight in the political arena have made labor the key element of most major progressive coalitions and election campaigns. The struggle for the unity of the labor movement on issues must be the foundation on which the broadest coalition can be built. ... The Communist Party, as part of the developing all-peoples front to defeat the ultra-right, participates fully with the labor movement and its allies in building a strong people’s electoral force.
Further, to defeat "monopolies," the Party lists the following goals:
The building of a mass people’s party capable of contending for governmental power, a party free of domination by any monopoly interests;
Removal from the electoral system of the financial contributions of monopolies, to be replaced by public funding and guarantees of honest elections where each vote counts and all votes are counted;
Replacing the foreign policy of preemptive strikes and dictating to the world in the interests of U.S.-based transnationals with a policy of international cooperation to solve problems of war and aggression, poverty, education, environment, health, and development;
Full restoration and expansion of the Bill of Rights and all democratic rights; the complete separation of church and state;
Full legal protection from hate crimes and racial profiling, and the outlawing of oral and written racist propaganda;
Implementation of affirmative action and compensatory programs to achieve actual equality for the racially and nationally oppressed and women;
Prevention of the “freedom” of monopolies to move assets in ways that harm workers and communities without full compensation; the guaranteed right to a job at living wages or full income through public works and public service jobs; the growth of public ownership of industries;
Elimination of management prerogatives coupled with the expansion of workers and union rights to prevent socially harmful management decisions;
Full funding for education, affordable housing programs, day care, Social Security, a universal health care program, youth job training and recreation programs, and cultural programs;
Creation of a social fund starting at $200 billion to make up for past and continuing wrongs and to help achieve equality in facilities and infrastructure for communities of the racially and nationally oppressed;
No taxes for workers and low and middle income people; progressive taxation of the wealthy and private corporations;
Military budget slashed to a fraction of current spending; and,
All media to be free of monopoly ownership.
Many of these will be checked off the list fairly immediately with an Obama presidency. And, finally, the tie to socialism. It's spelled out clearly as a stepping stone to a ensure a communist government:
Socialism will solve many of the intractable problems of capitalism, and provide the mechanisms for solving others over time. Once human need replaces greed and private profit as the driving force of the economy, once working people can together make decisions about the priorities of society, once serious steps to end exploitation and oppression are being implemented, once the people remove the power of the transnationals from the U.S. political system, then we can begin real, humane problem solving.
The Communist Party seeks to build socialism in the United States based on the revolutionary traditions and struggles of the people of our country. From before the start of the American Revolution up to today, workers, low-income people, and their allies have struggled to create and extend democracy. ... Communists advocate socialism as the first phase of a new stage of society, but we don’t think that social and economic development will end at socialism. We see socialist society eventually leading to a higher phase—communism—where the capitalist class and all classes will have disappeared, replaced by a commonwealth of all working people, and where national and racial enmity and prejudice will be things of the past. In communist society, the essentials of life will be plentiful and readily available to all, and the repressive apparatus of government will wither away leaving purely administrative functions. In the communist phase of society, social production and distribution of wealth would be according to the principals of the motto, “From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.” In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels wrote, “In place of the old bourgeois [capitalist] society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.”
It's almost as if Obama's entire campaign were based on this same manifesto—oh, wait, a thought occurred, what was it. Oh, let's just get back to the MSM, it's so much easier to believe.
If you need more evidence, the mainstream has finally begun to cover the fact that Obama was a member of the socialist New Party:
Barack Obama's childhood mentor 'Frank' member of socialist party and a pornographer (Part 1):
Barack Obama's childhood mentor 'Frank' member of socialist party and a pornographer (Part 2):
The Chicago Tribune—and, apparently, many socialist leaders—would like us to believe—against all logic—that Obama is not a socialist. You decide.
A look at the varying faces supporting John McCain—in their own words.
The 2008 election year has seen voters split and split again along lines of ideology and cause, race and religion, hopes and dreams—and change. Ultimately we're all Americans expressing our voice as only Americans can.
Below are the voices of just a few of those who support Senator John McCain for president. What they share in common is that they're Americans first, they refuse to be separated along lines of gender, race or religion and most importantly, they know that John McCain can deliver the change that is needed for all Americans.
There are those of us who see through the frenzied media machine that is Barack Obama. We choose to look beyond his carefully crafted words, because we cannot take him at his word; beyond dramatic posters, because we do not buy into media hype; beyond skin color, origin or ethnicity, because we don't choose our leaders based on appearance. We want a president who is strong, capable and most importantly ready to fight to ensure that we, as Americans, all have the opportunity to live in a country of amazing freedoms, democracy and opportunity.
Jackie Mason pokes holes in the 'schlep' and tells voters to support John McCain—or whoever they want.
The "Great Schlep": Sarah Silverman encourages young voters to harass their grandparents into voting for Barack Obama. We've got to give it to her, Silverman is very good at monologues, like that one from her Sarah Silverman Program where she had to go to court and fight to get her dog back—after she was caught licking its butt. We can appreciate the metaphor as it plays out in the "Great Schlep," and wonder just how many nannys, papis, grandmas or grandpas want advice from Silverman on judging character. She's got the market cornered on f@#king Matt Damon and shirking every ounce of morality, but little Sarah-bots berating grandparents—who've certainly earned the right to apply their experience in making a decision—seriously?
Jackie Mason seizes this sentiment with his response to the overzealous if not completely disgraceful Silverman.
"The Great Schlep"
*** UPDATED 10/18 **** Another famous Jewish liberal opines on Democrats:
The Obama-Bill Ayers connection has recently taken center stage in the media, casting a threatening shadow on the issues Obama would prefer to address. Some are wondering how '60s radical Ayers is relevant and accuse the McCain campaign of steering off course. So why are we still talking about Bill Ayers, a man who was bombing buildings when Barack Obama was only eight years old? This is a man who is now a "respected" professor paying his dues to society. Right? Or, on the flip side, is this a man who, given a second chance at living the American dream, found another avenue to employ his radical beliefs?
For those who believe there is a disconnect between Bill Ayers' past, Obama's ideology and our collective future, I ask you to read this article, which presents a clear and concise connection.
"Starting college in 1979, Obama describes how he chose his friends carefully: 'The more politically active black students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and the structural feminists and punk-rock performers.'
He describes how they discussed 'neo-colonialism, Frantz Fanon (the Black Power hero and apostle of cleansing violence), Eurocentrism, and patriarchy'; and how he read Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness 'to help me understand just what it is that makes white people so afraid ... Their demons.'"
Guilt by association is not the issue at hand, and Bill Ayers is not the core issue facing Americans leading up to this election. What America needs to contemplate is Who is Barack Obama? This is a young politician with ideas for "change." But what are his core beliefs and how do they apply to his leadership?
We choose our friends and associates—they are not forced upon us. Why is it then that Obama has chosen—and even sought out—radicals as his mentors, his friends, his neighbors and his colleagues. Why is it that all of these "associations" and allies in Obama's world share a common thread: revolution, socialism, communism, radicalism. Why is it that so many of these very same people can be traced back to relationships with groups like the Black Panthers and with ideologies like that of Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan?
Americans need to ask the tough questions and think about how this really affects our entire country, our children, our jobs, our lives.
*****************
"It's hard to say when it started ... 1970 to 1980. It was underground for 11 years."—Bernardine Dohrn, Weather Underground member and wife of Bill Ayers
"There's no way to be committed to non-violence in the middle of the most violent society that history's ever created. I'm not committed to non-violence." —Bernardine Dohrn, 1969
"During his fugitive years, Mr. Ayers said, he lived in 15 states, taking names of dead babies in cemeteries who were born in the same year as he. He describes the typical safe house: there were usually books by Malcolm X and Ho Chi Minh, and Che Guevara's picture in the bedroom; fermented Vietnamese fish sauce in the refrigerator, and live sourdough starter donated by a Native American that was reputed to have passed from hand to hand over a century."(New York Times, Sept. 11, 2001)
*****************
Sal Stern, in the City Journal, Summer 2006, wrote about Bill Ayers' entry into the American educational system. Attending Columbia Unversity's Teacher's College in 1984 (incidentally, during the same years Obama attended Columbia University -- both in NY), he experienced an "epiphany" while taking a class taught by Prof. Maxine Greene.
Greene told future teachers that they could help change this bleak landscape by developing a "transformative" vision of social justice and democracy in their classrooms. Her vision, though, was a far cry from the democratic optimism of the Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln, and Martin Luther King Jr., which most parents would endorse. Instead, critical pedagogy theorists nurse a rancorous view of an America in which it is always two minutes to midnight and a knock on the door by the thought police is imminent. The education professors feel themselves anointed to use the nation’s K–12 classrooms to resist this oppressive system. Thus Maxine Greene urged teachers not to mince words with children about the evils of the existing social order. They should portray "homelessness as a consequence of the private dealings of landlords, an arms buildup as a consequence of corporate decisions, racial exclusion as a consequence of a private property-holder’s choice." In other words, they should turn the little ones into young socialists and critical theorists.
And what has been the agenda of the reformed Bill Ayers of the 2000s? Sol Stern, of City Journal, reminds of us Bill Ayers' rendevous with Hugo Chavez in November 2006 in an article published Oct. 6, 2008:
Calling Bill Ayers a school reformer is a bit like calling Joseph Stalin an agricultural reformer. (If you find the metaphor strained, consider that Walter Duranty, the infamous New York Times reporter covering the Soviet Union in the 1930s, did, in fact, depict Stalin as a great land reformer who created happy, productive collective farms.) For instance, at a November 2006 education forum in Caracas, Venezuela, with President Hugo Chávez at his side, Ayers proclaimed his support for "the profound educational reforms under way here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chávez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution. ... I look forward to seeing how you continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane." Ayers concluded his speech by declaring that "Venezuela is poised to offer the world a new model of education—a humanizing and revolutionary model whose twin missions are enlightenment and liberation," and then, as in days of old, raised his fist and chanted: "Viva Presidente Chávez! Viva la Revolucion Bolivariana! Hasta la Victoria Siempre!"
*****************
(Updated 10/14/2008)
As if underpinning education with socialism and communism (disguised as "social justice") weren't bad enough, the Bill Ayers agenda goes even further. Linda Harvey writes this about the Bill Ayers "gay agenda" for schools:
In 2007, a group from the American Educational Research Association, or AERA, including Ayers, demanded major accrediting organization for schools, colleges, and departments of education include categories of "social justice, sexual orientation and gender identity" in its standards. Ayers and colleagues called their effort "Call to Action: A RED Campaign for Social Justice and Queer Lives." Ayers, formerly vice president for curriculum of the AERA, was the spokesman on behalf of the effort, calling on the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, or NCATE, to include these categories.
What would an Obama administration do? The record shows that Obama supported Illinois Senate Bill 99 in 2003, which, despite denials by Obama and false claims by the mainstream media, was not a bill to protect children from sexual predators. It was a sweeping, comprehensive sex-education bill that lowered the age of instruction from sixth grade to kindergarten, gutted an abstinence emphasis and prohibited "bias" based on "sexual orientation." The term "sexual predator" is nowhere in the bill, with inappropriate touching by peers included in a laundry list of the many aspects of explicit sex ed.
As a member of the Weather Underground, Ayers and Dohrn took part in sexual exploration which included group sex and homosexuality. This was somehow part of the groups manifesto. Impressing sexual education on children—and more specifically, homosexuality&mdashis part of the Ayers plan for education. But what should disturb Americans even more is the face you see plastered across your TV screen, your computers, your neighborhoods: Yes, Barack Obama supported lowering the age for sexual education&mdashto include your kindergartner.
" ... we'd do it again. I wish that we'd done more. I wish we'd been more militant ..."—Bernardine Dohrn, 1998 interview with Connie Chung (and William Ayers)
(Connie Chung interview, skip to the end of the video)
View the nine-part Weather Underground series here.
Who is Alexi Giannoulias? Could there really be yet another shady connection that will finally grow legs in the media.
Obama helped Alexi Giannoulias (D) win a run for Illinois State Treasurer. Giannoulias has helped fund Barack Obama. They met on a basketball court, and it appears the two scratch each others' backs. Giannoulias spoke at the DNC: "Barack Obama has been my basketball buddy, my friend, my mentor and my inspiration."
From Giannoulias' website: "Prior to taking office, Giannoulias served as vice president and senior loan officer at Broadway Bank in Chicago’s Edgewater community. Crain’s Chicago Business rated Broadway the No. 1 Bank in Illinois for five years based on return on assets. Giannoulias grew up in Chicago, graduated cum laude from Boston University and earned a law degree from Tulane University’s School of Law in New Orleans." Obama says about Giannoulias, "... he's one of the most outstanding young men that I could ever hope to meet ..."
But of course this beautiful marriage of money and politics is more than meets the eye. Giannoulias is rumored to have financed Chicago figures with ties to the mob. It is also rumored that Broadway Bank is about to come out as being politically connect with Tony Rezko. The Chicago Sun-Times reported on Oct. 11 that Tony Rezko has been "spilling the beans." And some are speculating that Obama could be looking at jail. (No Quarter has a different take on this story.)
This post won't go into detail, but suffice it to say, maybe America will pay close attention to this one, hitting a nerve overexposed by the economic crisis—shady bank dealings are not going to play out as well for Obama as, say, relationships with '60s bombers, radical reverends and Islamic financers (wait, why is it again that America doesn't care about those things?). It certainly sounds like a Hollywood plot, and the slick-as-oil Obama gets a starring role. Hopefully the next twist is which President in American history pardons Obama for his crimes—or doesn't.
Will we see more from McCain now that we've scratched the surface? Let's hope this is just the beginning, but with under a month left can McCain make up for the failures of the media? If Americans can detach Mr. Obama from their visions of Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream," they may finally realize this isn't the same man -- and this isn't the same dream. Martin Luther King was opposed by Louis Farrakhan. Rev. Wright, Al Sharpton, Father Pflegler, Rev. Meeks -- they all have connections to Farrakhan. They share an ideaology that Martin Luther King opposed. Americans can see that Mr. Obama not only condoned Bill Ayers viewpoints, but he launched his political career sitting in the man's living room -- just another neighbor down the block. Mr. Obama would like America to believe he has the character of the man endeared in America's heart, but that is only a dream. Please wake up.
"I don't know anyone in Chicago who is heavily in education policy who doesn't know Bill Ayers," she said. "But again I go back to the point that, you know, the American people aren't asking these questions." --Michelle Obama, 10/8/2008
I beg to differ Mrs. Obama. I'm an American, and I want answers.
Food for thought: Michelle Obama wants to speak for all Americans. Here she is pictured with Janell Meeks (wife of Rev. Meeks, Obama's "spiritual counsel") and Khadijah Farrakhan (wife of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan). Does Louis Farrakhan's message speak for you?
The Kenya connection: Barack Obama and Raila Odinga of Kenya's socialist Orange Democratic Movement, are cousins (Obama's father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya). In 2006, Barack Obama joined Raila Odinga in Kenya to help him campaign for election as Kenya's president. There were accusations of corrupt voting within the already volatile region. In January 2008, the International Campaign to End Genocide issued an alert and labeled the level of genocide a "Stage 6." Odinga, of the Orange Democratic Movement, lost the election by a small margin. What ensued following the election was widespread ethnic cleansing of the Kikuyu opposition. Georgette Gagnon of Human Rights Watch stated: "We have evidence that Orange Democratic Movement politicians and local leaders actively fomented post-election violence."
And maybe you heard about Jerome Corsi (listen to radio interview, bottom of page) being deported from Kenya on a trip to release an anti-Obama book. You guessed it, Barack Obama's cousin may have a hand in sending him home. (October 7, 2008)
*** UPDATE: 10/12/2008 ***** The Washington Times today published "HYMAN: Obama's Kenyan Ghosts," exposing the depth of Obama's ties with Raila Odinga.
Initially, Mr. Odinga was not the favored opposition candidate to stand in the 2007 election against President Mwai Kibaki, who was seeking his second term. However, he received a tremendous boost when Sen. Barack Obama arrived in Kenya in August 2006 to campaign on his behalf. Mr. Obama denies that supporting Mr. Odinga was the intention of his trip, but his actions and local media reports tell otherwise.
... Mr. Obama spoke on behalf of Mr. Odinga at numerous rallies. ... "The [Kenyan] people have to suffer over corruption perpetrated by government officials," Mr. Obama announced. "Kenyans are now yearning for change," he declared. The intent of Mr. Obama's remarks and actions was transparent to Kenyans - he was firmly behind Mr. Odinga.
...
Mr. Obama's judgment is seriously called into question when he backs an official with troubling ties to Muslim extremists and whose supporters practice ethnic cleansing and genocide. It was Islamic extremists in Kenya who bombed the U.S. Embassy in 1998, killing more than 200 and injuring thousands. None of this has dissuaded Mr. Obama from maintaining disturbing loyalties.
******************
From the video:
Raila Odinga is the leader of Kenya's largest opposition party, the socialist Orange Democratic Movement.
"The flamboyant politician became popular with Kenya's poor by pledging to distribute the country's wealth more evenly." -- CNN
Campaigned as a "champion of the poor" while promising to defend the underpriveledged
August 2007, Odinga signed an agreement with the National Muslim Leaders Forum to institute Islamic law in exchange for the group's support.
Louis Farrakhan is the Nation of Islam leader and has placed his support behind Barack Obama. Obama former paster of 20+ years, Reverend Jermiah Wright of Trinity United Church, holds Farrakhan in great esteem and honored him just this year with a lifetime achievement award at Trinity.
Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews, whites, America, and homosexuals. He has called whites “blue-eyed devils” and the “anti-Christ.” He has described Jews as “bloodsuckers” who control the government, the media, and some black organizations. (Newsmax.com, "Obama's Minister Honored Farrakhan," January 14, 2008)
Odinga's supporters engaged in widespread ethnic cleansing of the Kikuyu opposition, and Odinga continued to fan the flames of genocide.
Odinga vowed to end Kenya's cooperation with the United States in the War on Terror.
Raila Odinga & Barack Obama: The Connection Raila Odinga and Barack Obama, Odinga says, are cousins, both descended from the same tribe.
In 2006, as a member of the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama campaigned for Raila Odinga in Kenya -- at taxpayer expense.
Some Have Argued That Barack Obama's Terrorist Ties in Chicago Mean Nothing ... can they defend his support and backing of the brutality unleashed in Kenya? Massive killings in the name of Islam? You'll recognize that socialism is a common theme--redistribution of wealth is promised by both. You'll recognize that voting scandals are a parallel of what's happening in the U.S. Will you recognize that only YOU can stop Barack Obama from bringing America to her knees?
Fiery Speaker with the Populist Touch "Although his opponents have portrayed him as a socialist who could damage the economy, Odinga insists the business community has nothing to fear. His manifesto policies are similar to those of Kibaki, except with regard to devolution of power, which Odinga insists is necessary to ensure an equitable distribution of wealth."
This was the million-dollar question throughout the early part of the campaign: What does a community organizer do? Obama never really explained that clearly, and he denies that he worked for ACORN (although that "fact" changes by the minute--see my post here).
About this blogger I started this post with a lot to say, but there's just too much--should've started this blog a lot eariler. I'm not a right-wing, rabid Republican--although that seems to be the standard response from the left. I'm not proud to admit it, but I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992, as my head was filled with the propaganda spewed by my high school teachers--and union workers, one of which was in my household. Imagine my surprise to find my choice of president that year would result in making Monica Lewinsky a household name. Around the time of that election, I also learned a thing or two about unions and "scabs" and the scary world of forcing people to assimilate for the good of the masses. Bad workers cannot be fired. Good workers cannot move ahead. New workers cannot be hired. It's deadlock, and it's part of what's crippled the automotive companies. Socialism at work--making equality of inequality and inadequacy.
Suffice it to say that as I entered adulthood, my political views were in their infancy. Having skipped over that whole history thing in high school--or rather, having just barely picked up on the liberal view points but not really agreeing with them--I was a blank slate. And ready to vote? Bill Clinton was the choice--maybe the voice--of young people. He was on MTV after all. During my early 20s, I read Atlas Shrugged, I dealt with a tragic family death and had a child. I developed a new perspective on what it meant to be an American--an individual. As Thomas Sowell says, I grew up.
Who You Calling A Racist? "Say It Ain't So, Joe" or "Whatcha You Talkin' Bout Willis"? I like them both. If you don't like Obama, you're automatically a racist -- it's the automatic response from liberals. Does devaluing such a powerful word really help those who oppose racism?
Liberals tout Obama's education but discount his obvious ignorance in choosing his associates. It creates an interesting paradox. His followers and suppoters have turned a blind eye to any of these connections. They have no answers and can't bare to believe -- this is not a good thing.
For the little I knew about this league of Obama fans on sites like Digg, more importantly, I knew less about the Black empowerment movement that has been occurring in America all of my life. In recently researching Obama's ties to hate-filled groups, I'm truly astonished at this simmering revolution. Rev. Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton -- all have ties to Obama. The groups promote racism, hatred of Whites, of Jews. They promote the idea that white people -- White America -- are their oppressors, the enemy, the single wall between them and power, freedom, wealth. I've traced that legacy back through some other famous names: Malcolm X, Black Panthers and even MLK -- but MLK was considered a sell out to the white man. Louis Farrakhan encouraged a hit on Malcolm X, which ultimately led to his murder. In battling their oppression, they battled anyone who didn't completely agree with them, and their intentions are to fight ... to kill ... to conquer. It's been a wake-up call.
Without the influence of Obama's connections I might never have known that leagues of my fellow Americans -- Black Americans and other groups -- have been indoctrinated with ideas that I am oppressing them and they should rise up against me and even kill me (Farrakhan says in the name of Allah). Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews, Whites, America, lesbians, Hollywood. He has called Whites “blue-eyed devils” and the “anti-Christ.” He has described Jews as “bloodsuckers” who control the government, the media and some black organizations. (Newsmax.com, "Obama's Minister Honored Farrakhan," January 14, 2008)
The Obama liberals don't want to address any of these issues -- and, to them, racism only exists in the form of Republicans, those who question Barack Obama. They have no problem calling me a racist on a daily basis. But where are the answers?
Fact-finding and sources: I will do my best to research all information presented as thoroughly as possible. Although I am biased, I'll try to stick to the facts--but you may also get my opinion. I will give you sources as links and/or as footnotes where applicable and available. This is not a guarantee but merely a statement. If I get something wrong, I will correct it. Contact me if you find factual error with what I'm presenting.
