Don’t Tell Me Obama Isn’t A Marxist [Reader Post]

Loading

In an earlier post we learned that the Obama camp was busted having a flag of Commie Cuban thug, Che Guevara, prominently displayed on the wall in its Houston campaign office. In case you missed it, here’s a helpful reminder.

Che Guevara flag in Obama HQ in Texas

The video link is here of the news report from which it came (Ed – Video and post on this subject can also be seen here at Flopping Aces). Note that the news story was simply about the opening of the campaign office and mentioned nothing about the flag.

Now from Gabriel Malor at Ace we have another example of a Communist Obama supporter. This guy is a judge, in Ohio.


When did it become okay for an American judge to have a picture of a Communist in his chambers?

More importantly, when did it become okay for an American presidential candidate to be overtly supported by Communists and nobody find that utterly disqualifying for the job? What the hell is going on?

Doesn’t it disturb anyone that these brazen Communists support Obama’s platform and policies? They agree with his policies. They want him to be elected.

By the way, the Communists advocate the overthrow of the United States.

We know from this post, that Hamas, a terrorist group, supports Obama and wants him to be elected.

Am I the only one that worries that America’s enemies support the presumptive Democrat nominee for president of the United States? How many do you think support McCain?

Also find Bill Dupray at The Patriot Room

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Remember the big speaking event that Obam-uhh had out in Portland?

The one where the massive crowds gathered?

The event where Obam-uhh spoke after a free concert by “The Decemberists”?

That band opens their concerts with the Soviet national anthem as they did the day that Obam-uhh spoke.

Yeah, Aye Chi, and the Beatles sang “Back in the USSR.” In fact, they were one of the most apolitical bands around in the Sixties.

Let me say at the outset my goal here is not to justify the display of Che Guevara’s image in the campaign office of an American presidential candidate, except on free speech grounds. I personally object to the romanticization of Che Guevara, because it hides the reality of his career. My favorite is a T-shirt I’ve seen with an image of Che wearing a Bart Simpson T-shirt.

More importantly, I will say that Communism was the most oppressive system of government ever to plague mankind – in terms of its geographical reach, the sheer numbers of its victims, and the efficiency of its programs of expansion and repression.

Having said that, Obama is no more a Marxist than he is a Muslim. There are people witihin the Republican Party and active in Republican presidential campaigns, including Senator McCain’s whose view and past activities you would not want to have to justify.

I think the “busted” theme of this thread is fair, but let’s put it in perspective.

Surely you’re not trying to equate the Soviet national anthem with a Beatles song.

This thread, the Che flag, the Soviet national anthem, the ongoing thread about the gun fight comment, in addition to the others….All of those things go back to what I refer to as Obie’s “tin ear”.

Obama is no more a Marxist than he is a Muslim

Heh, apparently Barack’s half-brother didn’t get the memo about the Muslim part.

@Dave Noble, of course Obama is marxist! How gullible and ignorant are you?

Look at his personal history, his associations, his voting record, the things he says inbetween the hollow phrases.

FYI, I studied political science in Amsterdam. I recognize a marxist when I see one. Obama is a red diaper baby, an anti-anti-communist, a post-socialist, a neo-marxist, whatever. Every generation marxists try to start over with a clean slate and every time it’s the same old crap.

I don’t necessarliy believe Obama is a Marxist or a communist. But I don’t know what Obama really believes. I do know that he and his handlers are anti-gun, and he hides that fact rather well from the national media and electorate. So it is possible that he is hiding other true feelings from us.

Nevertheless, many of Obama’s supporters are / have strong Marxist, communist, statist beliefs. One such person is Jesse Jackson. Please read _Shakedown_ for more details. Jackson does not want total communist rule of America. He still wants Americans to own and operate private businesses. He wants this to still occur so he and his ilk can force a parasitic relationship upon said businesses and extort money from them.

Jackson sent his son Youseff (sp?) to help Hillary. He sent another son, Jesse Jr. (US Rep from Chicago) to stump for Camp Obama. Camp Obama is doing very well in hiding the Jesse Factor.

Aye Chi, my point in comparing the Decembrists with the Beatles is that in the case of the Beatles, their song was not an expression of nostalgia for the USSR, it was ironic. Lennon’s tongue as always was firmly planted in his cheek. Similarly, to divine from the Decembrists use of the Soviet anthem that they long for the return of that regime is an exercise in overliteralism.

I really don’t want to get in a long discussion of a rock band, but since you choose to find telling political signifciance in the Decembrists, I note their name comes from a non-Communist group of Soviet officers who staged a revolt in 1825 against the reinstatement of the Czar. Their totaliatrian goal: a constitution for Russia in place of a despotic monarchy. Sound familiar to any other historical movement? I’m sure you’ll note that in 1825, Karl Marx was 7 years old. His Manifesto was 23 years in the future.

I checked the cite, his Obama’shalf-brother says he was raised as a Muslim. Assuming for the sake of argument that he is an authoritative source, the Pope was a Hitler Youth, does he therefore harbor Fascist symphathies? Criticize Obama on his policies as vigorously as you like, but the endless attempt using innuendo and association to prove him a Manchurian candidate smells of desperation.

Peter,

Whenever someone leads with “of course,” I know bald assertions will substitute for argument based on fact and logic.

Whenever in the future I want to know if someone is a Marxist, I’ll seek your expert opinion since you studied politcial science in Amsterdam.

I also appreciate the precison of your analysis:

“Obama is a red diaper baby, an anti-anti-communist, a post-socialist, a neo-marxist, whatever. ”

Define Marxist.

Dave Noble, according to the Marism List… who I’m going to take a wild guess would consider themselves authority on modern Marxism, they classify themselves as socialists.

Socialism is, per their own FAQs, the first form of the new society. Communism is a further development or “higher stage” of socialism.

They differentiate themselves from the full Communist state as below:

Socialism is the first step in the process of developing the productive forces to achieve abundance and changing the mental and spiritual outlook of the people. It is the necessary transition stage from capitalism to communism.

snip

The Socialists, on the other hand, believe that it is possible to make the transition from capitalism to socialism without a basic change in the character of the state. They hold this view because they do not think of the capitalist state as essentially an institution for the dictatorship of the capitalist class, but rather as a perfectly good piece of machinery which can be used in the interest of whichever class gets command of it. No need, then, for the working class in power to smash the old capitalist state apparatus and set up its own—the march to socialism can be made step by step within the framework of the democratic forms of the capitalist

They say socialism advocates the people increasing their “private property”, but they make careful distinctions on what they consider “property”.

Socialism does not mean taking away the first kind of private property, e.g. your suit of clothes; it does mean taking away the second kind of private property, e.g. your factory for making suits of clothes. It means taking away private property in the means of production from the few so that there will be much more private property in the means of consumption for the many. That part of the wealth which is produced by workers and taken from them in the form of profits would be theirs, under socialism, to buy more private property, more suits of clothes, more furniture, more food, more tickets to the movies.

Let’s compare this base socialist/Marxist thought to Obama’s policies. From his energy policy:

100% Allowance Auction: Without a profit motive or incentive to innovate, corporations do not spend time or money to develop new clean ways of doing business. Obama’s cap-and-trade system will require all pollution credits to be auctioned. A 100% auction ensures that all polluters pay for every ton of emissions they release, rather than giving these emission rights away for free to coal and oil companies.

snip

Barack Obama will use some of the revenue generated from the cap-and-trade permit auction to invest in climate-friendly energy development and deployment. This will transform the economy and create millions of new jobs. Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial scale renewable energy, invest in low emissions coal plants, and begin transition to a new digital electricity grid.

snip

Obama will double our nation’s commitment to energy R&D
and rely more heavily on the tremendous resources and ability of our national laboratories, universities and land grant colleges which have significant expertise in rural sources of renewable energy.

Well duh to the highlighted statement. Of course private companies need profit to continue to exist. They also feed off the free market needs and trends. If there were a way to provide the clean, low cost energy to the masses right now, they’d be doing it. And even now they seek the profitable path to provide this for the future…. if they can get out from all the goverment regulations and penalties that drain their R&D capital.

If BHO insists on windfall taxes and controlling the profit of the private industry, how does that differ from assuming ownership? A private citizen may hold title, but they are monitored on just how much profit they can make, because it will be confiscated by the feds.

Obama plans to take profits and force the development, even if the concept is an in the red proposition. That $150 billion? Where will it come but from us, the tax payer? If we put all that into the industry, will you believe we’d be doing that for a privately owned firm, or a firm where the govt will again confiscate the profits or assume partial or full ownership?

I believe Obama is advocating government controlled, if not outright government owned, energy for the future. Which makes him not much different an Chavez, seizing Venezuela’s energy industry for “the people”.

Obama believes in utilizing coal, however his cap and trade makes it economically feasible for existing coal facilities to operate. He even admits this himself. If he mandates EPA updates, and the private market can’t do it and still maintain a profit, just who will end up witih the coal businesses? The government. The only way a private enterprise can run in the red and still remain in business is to be government owned. Otherwise it falls into bankruptcy and ceases to exist.

This is only a tiny section of the federal spending Obama’s planning. All his proposals are “federal” this, “federal” that. He’ll create beaucoup jobs, alright. All government jobs that result from his increased federal involvement in businesses.

There is little about any of Obama’s proposals that differ from the foundation: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs From education to energy, the wealthier citizens are to fund the not-so-wealthy citizens until, of course, we will have no wealthy citizens left. Then what? It is on the shoulders of the entrepreneurial that this country functions, and our technology remains advanced.

You’re incorrect.

I find no significance in a rock band at all.

The willingness of Obama to associate himself with a band that opens every concert with the Soviet national anthem, however, is quite revealing. Having read some interviews with the members of this band makes it even more surprising that Obama would want that association.

Of course, he associated with Wright and Ayers and Dohrn for years without negative effect.

Moving on a bit.

Your comparison to the Pope, and his forced participation in the Hitler youth is a bit of a stretch even for you. The Pope, as you know, got out as soon as he had fulfilled his forced obligation, and most importantly, has been completely honest about that segment of his life.

Obama’s known deceptions, and the evolutions thereof, regarding his faith are a fair topic don’t you think?

Telling the truth up front, rather than engaging in a series of nuanced, morphing stories would have put this matter to rest on the front end.

Explaining these things away, or ignoring the value of their examination, is an obvious attempt at willful ignorance.

Aye Chi, as one who lives uncomfortably close to Portland, I might offer a different perspective on why The Decembrists.

Personally, I don’t think Obama knew, or cared, about what band opened – or their set list. I think his event planners just sought one of the biggest draw bands to use because it makes good visual and high attendence.

Because Portland is… well… Portland, the Decembrists fit the bill. So personally I doubt it was a deliberate association, but the result of the popularity of socialism in Portland as reflected in their choice of bands and music. Don’t forget, this is a place that regularly holds fund raisers for ELF members.

Mata,

You may be correct.

This is just another indication to me, along with a long list of others, that Obama is green and not nearly ready for prime time.

More of what I refer to as the “tin ear”.

He should have been well aware that what happens in Oregon, for example, can and will be viewed very differently by those of us who live in the other 57 states.

Obama was trying to hide his Marxism, but he didn’t expect such a vigilant citizen-journalist. You found the posters! You cracked the code! TELL THE WORLD!

Communist Obama and his Pro-Abortion Socialist Gestapo will CHANGE USA into USSA – United Socialist States of America.

http://www.marianland.com/music/changealbum.html